for the 2016 Chevy Traverse, GMC Acadia, and the Buick Enclave.
ABC News article he http://alturl.com/kgqfx

--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On Sat, 14 May 2016 08:59:52 -0500
"Dean Hoffman" wrote:


for the 2016 Chevy Traverse, GMC Acadia, and the Buick Enclave.
ABC News article he http://alturl.com/kgqfx


They state what the government tells them to.

On Sat, 14 May 2016 10:57:06 -0500, burfordTjustice
wrote:

On Sat, 14 May 2016 08:59:52 -0500
"Dean Hoffman" wrote:


for the 2016 Chevy Traverse, GMC Acadia, and the Buick Enclave.
ABC News article he http://alturl.com/kgqfx


They state what the government tells them to.

The auto makers do their own testing. From the article:

"All automakers do their own testing for mileage under EPA guidelines and
submit figures
to the agency, which does spot checks to verify the figures. In 2012, the
agency found that
Hyundai and Kia had overstated mileage on 13 models from 2011 through 2013
that totaled about
1.2 million vehicles. Mileage on one vehicle was overstated by six mpg."


--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On Sat, 14 May 2016 11:10:20 -0500
"Dean Hoffman" wrote:

EPA guidelines

That tells you the other two did not state
what the EPA told them to.

Testing is done of paper not on the road.

On Sat, 14 May 2016 11:26:19 -0500, burfordTjustice
wrote:

On Sat, 14 May 2016 11:10:20 -0500
"Dean Hoffman" wrote:

EPA guidelines

That tells you the other two did not state
what the EPA told them to.

Testing is done of paper not on the road.

It looks like it's done in a lab according to this:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml

The first paragraph says:

"Fuel economy is measured under controlled conditions in a
laboratory using a standardized test procedure specified by
federal law. Manufacturers test their own vehicles€”usually
pre-production prototypes€”and report the results to EPA. EPA
reviews the results and confirms about 10%€“15% of them through
their own tests at the National Vehicles and Fuel Emissions
Laboratory."


--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On Sun, 15 May 2016 10:34:58 -0500
"Dean Hoffman" wrote:

On Sat, 14 May 2016 11:26:19 -0500, burfordTjustice
wrote:

On Sat, 14 May 2016 11:10:20 -0500
"Dean Hoffman" wrote:

EPA guidelines

That tells you the other two did not state
what the EPA told them to.

Testing is done of paper not on the road.

It looks like it's done in a lab according to this:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml

The first paragraph says:

"Fuel economy is measured under controlled conditions in a
laboratory using a standardized test procedure specified by
federal law. Manufacturers test their own vehicles€”usually
pre-production prototypes€”and report the results to EPA. EPA
reviews the results and confirms about 10%€“15% of them through
their own tests at the National Vehicles and Fuel Emissions
Laboratory."



Believe what you wish...the system is NOT what you
think it appears to be.

On 5/14/2016 6:59 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:

for the 2016 Chevy Traverse, GMC Acadia, and the Buick Enclave.
ABC News article he http://alturl.com/kgqfx

Amusing in that AFAICT, most folks get BETTER mileage than
the data published for their vehicles. E.g., our vehicle is
("up to") 20/29 yet we've consistently averaged better than
the "20" in town -- despite the fact that the car claims
our average speed to be about 19MPH (over the last 10 months).

My trip to the local library this morning clocked in at 29.7
(no "highway" driving involved)

On 05/14/2016 05:12 PM, Don Y wrote:
Amusing in that AFAICT, most folks get BETTER mileage than
the data published for their vehicles. E.g., our vehicle is
("up to") 20/29 yet we've consistently averaged better than
the "20" in town -- despite the fact that the car claims
our average speed to be about 19MPH (over the last 10 months).

According to the ScanGauge my Toyota does better than the EPA rating
unless I'm running 80 mph or so.

On 5/14/2016 6:08 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 05/14/2016 05:12 PM, Don Y wrote:
Amusing in that AFAICT, most folks get BETTER mileage than
the data published for their vehicles. E.g., our vehicle is
("up to") 20/29 yet we've consistently averaged better than
the "20" in town -- despite the fact that the car claims
our average speed to be about 19MPH (over the last 10 months).

According to the ScanGauge my Toyota does better than the EPA rating unless I'm
running 80 mph or so.

We've not yet had the car "on the highway" so no idea what it
will do with the chance to "cruise" (instead of the stop-n-go
that we experience in town). Hard to come up with anyplace
we'd want to *go* that would require any sort of serious
driving! : Might be fun to actually play with some of
its toys while not having to watch for the stop sign at
the next corner...

On 05/14/2016 07:25 PM, Don Y wrote:
We've not yet had the car "on the highway" so no idea what it
will do with the chance to "cruise" (instead of the stop-n-go
that we experience in town). Hard to come up with anyplace
we'd want to *go* that would require any sort of serious
driving! : Might be fun to actually play with some of
its toys while not having to watch for the stop sign at
the next corner...

In Montana it's hard to come up with anyplace to go that does not
require serious driving

On 5/14/2016 10:01 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 05/14/2016 07:25 PM, Don Y wrote:
We've not yet had the car "on the highway" so no idea what it
will do with the chance to "cruise" (instead of the stop-n-go
that we experience in town). Hard to come up with anyplace
we'd want to *go* that would require any sort of serious
driving! : Might be fun to actually play with some of
its toys while not having to watch for the stop sign at
the next corner...

In Montana it's hard to come up with anyplace to go that does not require
serious driving

Well, once "out of town", that's the way it would be, here
(as you know).

Unfortunately, *getting* out of town is a major challenge from
our location (I10 goes south and west of town; we're north and east).
So, the better part of an hour to get *on* the interstate (if
headed to feenigs)

OTOH, you can do 45 on many of the roads in town -- just not for
very FAR (before encountering yet-another-traffic-signal). A bit
over 4000 miles on the car -- at an average speed of 18 MPH (I think).

On 5/14/2016 7:12 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 5/14/2016 6:59 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:

for the 2016 Chevy Traverse, GMC Acadia, and the Buick Enclave.
ABC News article he http://alturl.com/kgqfx

Amusing in that AFAICT, most folks get BETTER mileage than
the data published for their vehicles. E.g., our vehicle is
("up to") 20/29 yet we've consistently averaged better than
the "20" in town -- despite the fact that the car claims
our average speed to be about 19MPH (over the last 10 months).

My trip to the local library this morning clocked in at 29.7
(no "highway" driving involved)


Where are you getting the numbers? Since you are talking a trip this
morning are you using what the car is telling you? If so, it is
probably wrong.

The last five cars (different brands) had the computer that gave you the
mpg of a trip and since the last fill up. I've checked the old method
of filling the tank and calculating. The car computer ranged from 2 to
6 mpg too high

In reality, it is very rare to really get what the official rating is.
Verified over hndreds of tanks of gas on many cars.

On 5/14/2016 7:32 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
Where are you getting the numbers? Since you are talking a trip this morning
are you using what the car is telling you? If so, it is probably wrong.

The last five cars (different brands) had the computer that gave you the mpg of
a trip and since the last fill up. I've checked the old method of filling the
tank and calculating. The car computer ranged from 2 to 6 mpg too high

Ours has been really close. We record the odometer reading and the gallons
of fuel that the *pump* claims to have dispensed. We compare this to the total
that the car reports for each tankful along with the running average. The
car always reports *lower* MPG than we calculate.

E.g., car reports 190.3 miles on the last tank. (the car decides when it
has been "filled"; we don't "tell it"). Car claims 20.5 MPG. Simple
arithmetic suggests the actual efficiency was 21.29 MPG.

For a car that claims to get "up to" 20MPG in city driving.

Of course, if car was claiming 29 MPG for each "trip" -- then reporting an
average of 20 for the tank, we would be suspicious. OTOH, when we see it
report *5.8* MPG for a trip down the block (*a* block), we don't start
sweating!

In reality, it is very rare to really get what the official rating is. Verified
over hndreds of tanks of gas on many cars.

Perhaps you should buy a "smarter" car? :

Our vehicle currently has ~4300 miles on it. As of the last fillup (at
4259), we'd pumped 214.402 gallons into it. That's 19.86 MPG over the life
of the car.

If the manufacturer told me "up to 20 MPG" and I calculate 19.86 -- while
the car claims 19 (doesn't display tenths) as its average -- I'm not going
to gripe that "I'm not getting what the official rating is"!

On 05/14/2016 08:32 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
The last five cars (different brands) had the computer that gave you the
mpg of a trip and since the last fill up. I've checked the old method
of filling the tank and calculating. The car computer ranged from 2 to
6 mpg too high

I go by a ScanGauge plugged into the ODB. When I fill up it is usually
within a tenth of a gallon on how much will take to fill the tank and
the tank mpg numbers jibe with the odometer.

On 5/15/2016 12:05 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 05/14/2016 08:32 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
The last five cars (different brands) had the computer that gave you the
mpg of a trip and since the last fill up. I've checked the old method
of filling the tank and calculating. The car computer ranged from 2 to
6 mpg too high

I go by a ScanGauge plugged into the ODB. When I fill up it is usually
within a tenth of a gallon on how much will take to fill the tank and
the tank mpg numbers jibe with the odometer.


cost of fuel is only one of the variables ... how much to get a mile
down the road is the bottom line. AAA says..
http://exchange.aaa.com/wp-content/u...Costs-2015.pdf

On 5/16/2016 12:48 PM, My 2 Cents wrote:
On 5/15/2016 12:05 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 05/14/2016 08:32 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
The last five cars (different brands) had the computer that gave you the
mpg of a trip and since the last fill up. I've checked the old method
of filling the tank and calculating. The car computer ranged from 2 to
6 mpg too high

I go by a ScanGauge plugged into the ODB. When I fill up it is usually
within a tenth of a gallon on how much will take to fill the tank and
the tank mpg numbers jibe with the odometer.

cost of fuel is only one of the variables ... how much to get a mile down the
road is the bottom line. AAA says..
http://exchange.aaa.com/wp-content/u...Costs-2015.pdf

The metric is "miles per GALLON (of fuel)" -- not miles per DOLLAR.

On 5/14/2016 9:59 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:

for the 2016 Chevy Traverse, GMC Acadia, and the Buick Enclave.
ABC News article he http://alturl.com/kgqfx


Instantaneous readout on my new Subaru indicates I get 100 mpg going
down hill.

Wonder if that guy with little "d" after his name will mandate that
roads can only go down hill? Would sure help deter climate change.
If states do no follow mandate, they will not get highway funds from the
fed.

On 05/16/2016 01:34 PM, Frank wrote:
Instantaneous readout on my new Subaru indicates I get 100 mpg going
down hill.

when I first got the ScanGauge I had it in instantaneous mode. I think
the injectors shut off completely when you're coasting. That mode isn't
too useful in town.

On 5/16/2016 8:10 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 05/16/2016 01:34 PM, Frank wrote:
Instantaneous readout on my new Subaru indicates I get 100 mpg going
down hill.

when I first got the ScanGauge I had it in instantaneous mode. I think the
injectors shut off completely when you're coasting. That mode isn't too useful
in town.

New cars play games shutting down cylinders when the power isn't
required.

On 5/16/2016 11:29 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 5/16/2016 8:10 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 05/16/2016 01:34 PM, Frank wrote:
Instantaneous readout on my new Subaru indicates I get 100 mpg going
down hill.

when I first got the ScanGauge I had it in instantaneous mode. I think
the
injectors shut off completely when you're coasting. That mode isn't
too useful
in town.

New cars play games shutting down cylinders when the power isn't
required.

Doubt this is happening on the Subaru.
I don't know how they can instantaneously measure mileage and would
think it extremely hard to do it on fuel usage.
Car also has a CVT which gives maybe an extra mpg.

On 5/17/2016 6:05 AM, Frank wrote:
New cars play games shutting down cylinders when the power isn't
required.

Doubt this is happening on the Subaru.
I don't know how they can instantaneously measure mileage and would think it
extremely hard to do it on fuel usage.
Car also has a CVT which gives maybe an extra mpg.

Mileage is a takeoff on the tranny -- count wheel rotations per unit time
(or, at very low speeds, time per wheel rotation); ditto driveshaft, etc.

Fuel usage is by monitoring how *they* fire the injectors. You know how
much fuel is introduced with each activation (if it wasn't predictable,
the engine wouldn't run smoothly).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_Cylinder_Management
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Fuel_Management
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Displacement_System

It will be interesting to see how their CVT holds up over time!

We liked the two Subarus we test drove. But, the "tranny hump"
(where the bell housing would be on a rear-wheel drive vehicle)
was too wide and encroached on the leg position for the passenger
(your left foot can't be placed directly in front of your left *hip*,
let alone to the *left* of it!)

On 05/17/2016 07:05 AM, Frank wrote:
I don't know how they can instantaneously measure mileage and would
think it extremely hard to do it on fuel usage.
Car also has a CVT which gives maybe an extra mpg.

Fuel flow versus speed.

On Monday, May 16, 2016 at 11:29:32 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 5/16/2016 8:10 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 05/16/2016 01:34 PM, Frank wrote:
Instantaneous readout on my new Subaru indicates I get 100 mpg going
down hill.

when I first got the ScanGauge I had it in instantaneous mode. I think the
injectors shut off completely when you're coasting. That mode isn't too useful
in town.

New cars play games shutting down cylinders when the power isn't
required.

My Odyssey *used* to do that but I've disabled it. Honda calls it Variable
Cylinder Management and most Ody and Pilot drivers hate it. There was even
a Class Action suit against it due to fouled spark plugs, failing motor
mounts and excessive oil consumption. That is in addition to the driveability
issues related to vibration, stuttering, delayed accelerating, etc.

Last year a guy invented what he calls the VCMuzzler. It is nothing more
than a resistor with Honda OEM connectors that you place between the
Engine Coolant Temperature sensor and the ECU. It fools the ECU into thinking
that the ECT is a few degress below the threshold required for VCM to
engage. He has worked out the resistance value such that it doesn't impact
the fuel mixture curve at low temps or cause a CEL.

The original version had only 1 inline resistor, but as more and more people
bought the device, it became apparent that different values were required
based on the ambient temperature of the environment. The 2nd generation has
a extra connector so that different value resistors can be tested. I've been
running with a 100Ω resistor for about a year and the only time VCM has kicked
in was when I was towing a trailer through the hills in 90° temps. The
engine would heat up while climbing and the VCM would kick in as I coasted
down hill. Once the engine cooled down a bit, no more VCM, so there was
no impact on the driveability.

The device has thousands upon thousands of miles on it all across the
country and users couldn't be happier. Many of us have had our cars
inspected with the VCMuzzler installed and there has never been an issue.
The fact that it is plug-and-play means that it can be removed for testing
if there is any concern that it is causing an problem but I have never heard
of an single issue and I follow the forum threads on it just in case.

This video is a short (1:58) install video showing the device:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DewUNWlh1zU

Don Y
Tue, 17 May 2016 03:29:35 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 5/16/2016 8:10 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 05/16/2016 01:34 PM, Frank wrote:
Instantaneous readout on my new Subaru indicates I get 100 mpg
going down hill.

when I first got the ScanGauge I had it in instantaneous mode. I
think the injectors shut off completely when you're coasting.
That mode isn't too useful in town.

New cars play games shutting down cylinders when the power isn't
required.


And the manufacturers know that over time, this really isn't good for
the engine. They're counting on it, actually. Cars aren't built to last
for too much longer than it should take you to pay it off now. And, go
back into debt with another one. Job security?




--
MID:
Hmmm. I most certainly don't understand how I can access a copy of a
zip file but then not be able to unzip it so I can watch it. That
seems VERY clever!
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=145716711400