I have actually owned a Jeep Liberty CRD - and several other diesels for that matter. The ONLY way that pig would get 34 MPG would be a long downhill run with a 60 MPH tail wind. In mixed driving ours would get 21 MPG every day. On one long trip it actually got almost 26 MPG. There are some that claimed 30+ mpg but that was after mods, and I would guess, long trips at 45 MPH. I notice they are not comparing quality and reliability in the article - Hey, maybe that's how they achieved such good fuel economy, with the Jeep on the back of a tow truck. When I think about it, if I factored in the miles mine spent on the back of a tow truck maybe it did get 30+ MPG on a few occasions!
Me too. But whether or not there is a bladder, their % off between calculated and computer suggests they crammed in way more at the end than they used. My computer is off (generous) by about 2%, or 1 MPG. My wife's is also generous, about 3%. A 160 mile trip likely used little more than 3 gallons at worst. Without special test tanks or inline flow metering, the only way they can ensure ACTUAL use would be to fill before and after the test until they had gas at the top of the filler neck. This isn't environmentally friendly and it might fill your charcoal canister with gas so don't try it at home with YOUR car I am curious as to the speed they traveled on the motorway. To claim that the batteries are of no use at cruising speed is in opposition with my experience. My Interstate driving includes a fair bit of vertical ascent/descent and the battery is clearly involved in EASILY maintaining speed. But then, I drive 65 MPH max, not sure how well a Prius runs at 85 MPH. The only way they could manage < 40 MPG on a 160 mile trip would be to travel at 75+ MPH, mostly uphill in sub freezing temperatures running on snow tires and E10. Put any knowledgeable Prius driver behind the wheel and I suspect their computer 57 MPG would be eclipsed. They had a hard time getting it into Drive from Park (SO confusing!), I bet they have no idea how to glide
Calculating mpg at the pump just isn't accurate because the tank apparently fills differently each time.My first gas fill at 150 miles, I calculated 65 mpg vs 48 mpg reading on the computer. I concluded the computer was more accurate, and the dealer probably filled higher on the first fill (by about .8 gallons) than I did using the auto-stop at the pump. That article looks like those testers may have had an agenda. They are dead wrong. This is nothing new in the media these days--especially with a paradigm change in car technology confronting the industry. There is resistance.
As long as I don't have to talk with them directly. Interviews didn't go so well in the past. They'd approach with an angle, sometimes in conflict with the message I was trying to convey. But the website speaks for itself... lots of raw data for people to draw their own conclusions with. And hopefully, they'll have the opportunity to continue doing that for quite awhile still. I just renewed the domain name through July 2017. .
