Autonews.com/Bloomberg: Big gain in US fleet MPG; but Toyota not in top 3

The report is here: Light-Duty Automotive Technology, Carbon Dioxide Emissions, and Fuel Economy Trends: 1975 Through 2012 | OTAQ | US EPA
The Excel spreadsheet is here: Fuel Economy Data Stratified by Manufacturer and Vehicle Type (Excel)

The Corporate Mileage is the average of all the manufacturer's cars, SUVs, and trucks.

It heavily favors manufacturers who make small cars and don't sell a lot of trucks.

This is why U.S. Manufacturers are hamstrung. GM, Ford and Chrysler sell a ton of trucks for business use and otherwise. Yet those trucks count toward the total corporate mileage.

Honda's corporate mileage is 26.4 MPG.

Volkswagen's corporate mileage is 26.3 MPG.

Mazda's corporate mileage is 25.9 MPG.

Toyota's corporate mileage is 25.6 MPG.

Chrysler's corporate mileage is 20.6 MPG.

 

That's another "narrow minded survey."

There is a lot more to ownership and economy for a car than just mileage.

Drivability, function and long term life of a vehicle without expensive maintenance is very very important.

All of the complicated "new fangled" gadgets have not established a track record for reliability.

I'll stick with the "tried and true" Toyota Prius hybrid system.

 

It is supposed to be narrow minded, it is a single factor. It is not intended to answer what kind of car technology is the most efficient, just what the average mileage of each manufacturer is.

 

but the o/p doesn't understand that. otherwise, he wouldn't have stated 'i'm not sure why toyota isn't in there'. by it's very nature, it is confusing to many people and leads some to believe the manufacturers at the top of the list have the most efficient vehicles.

 

Hmmm, it seems pretty straight forward to me, but you are right, judging from the original post perhaps not.
However, I don't think the original article is unclear. So I don't understand why someone would say it was a "narrow minded survey" when it wasn't meant to be, and didn't say it was anything else.

 

The fact is that with all the credit that Toyota gets with the Prius they are not at the top when it comes to fuel economy...

 

It's journalism for the sake of getting attention and headlines, that's all.

Anyone buying a car should consider more than that.

 

Toyota gains kudos for making the Prius. Consumers have to get a clue all by their little lonesomes.

 

This data is virtually irrelevant to a car buyer as no one I know buys a fleet average, they buy an individual model.
Anyone buying a car should consider a number of different factors, but this is one that really shouldn't even be on the list for an individual car buyer.
It would be like someone considering the nationwide electric grid average for their individual PEV purchase, just not relevant.

 

The data is relevant in that it is a political football.

The US Government and some State Governments wanted years ago to force manufacturers to raise the average corporate mileage to 50 MPG.

Yes, this is nice, but it was impossible to do at the time and still is. So the US Manufacturers complained and the government backed off its steep demand.

Think about it: For the past decade, only the Prius is able to average 50 MPG. Other car manufacturers still have a lot of work to do to catch up with the Prius.

 

I agree. I wasn't saying the data point wasn't relevant at all. What I said is that it is not relevant to individual car buyers.

As for the CAFE standards, the calculations are different for that than what the EPA puts on car stickers.
The 50mpg Prius for example is rated about 68-70 CAFE.
37mpg window sticker meets the 50mpg CAFE requirement.

 

We have had 3 forces against cafe requirements the insurance institute, UAW, and auto manufacturers. Real CAFE could have definitely risen in 90s, but politics had fuel economy not improve. Rules written into cafe requirements favored large SUVs instead of cars. As public policy this was bad for most of the country but helpful to a small group of people.

From a reduction of imported oil, the stated goal of cafe, it doesn't matter that a large SUV is inherently less efficient. The rules are blind. Many that buy large SUVs do not really require them. Those manufacturers that manufacture a large percentage of trucks and SUVs though will be at a disadvantage to companies like honda, vw, mazda that sell mainly cars.

Cafe rules put in the 1970s did help reduce oil use in the '80s. We can expect those put in now to reduce future oil use. They are not necessarily fair, but they are effective. New rules for 2025 do mostly close the SUV loophole.

Cafe standards can only give consumers more choice. If someone needs a truck they will buy a truck, not a prius. But lack of increasing standards along with standards that rewarded manufacturers for producing SUVs did likely produce a less efficient fleet.

 

Ford is biggest in percentage of trucks. GM and Chyrsler will have the biggest problems meeting future cafe. Toyota does much better than the leaders in cafe selling trucks and midsize and large SUVs. The way you win the mpg crown is by losing in these profitable segments.

Last year the Tacoma and tundra were the 5th and 6th best selling trucks. The highlander sells near the top of the mid sized SUV market. These vehicles bring down the average fuel economy.

 

Yaris and Corolla get pretty bad EPA ratings... despite doing really well when it comes to real life, thats the catch 22.