International Fuel Consumption (Cars)

[silbeej]

Just did a conversion, and the Audi UK site lists the A4 sedan at 169g/km of CO2, where as based on figures from the terrapass.com website, the equivalent US car gets .9559lbs/mile, or 269g/km of CO2.

Not too good i'd say. It all comes down to the MPG. The more fuel used, the more pollutants it produces.

 

[MalcolmJID]

Just did a conversion, and the Audi UK site lists the A4 sedan at 169g/km of CO2, where as based on figures from the terrapass.com website, the equivalent US car gets .9559lbs/mile, or 269g/km of CO2.

Not too good i'd say. It all comes down to the MPG.

MPG all comes down to the efficiency of the combustion in the engine. As well as this, if the combustion of the engine is a lot more efficient, then emissions are a lot lower.

 

[jb60606]

Is it just me, or do European vehicles get much better fuel economy than those which are sold here in the states? I don't want to judge anyone, but come on, how about the companies sell us some decent vehicles here in America.

this is nothing new. They've always had cars featuring better fuel economy. With the amount they pay per gallon/litre (roughly more than twice of what we pay), it's the only choice for many.

I saw quite a few "Smart Cars" the last time I was in Spain and actually got the opportunity to drive one. Too bad we'll never see something similar in the US; we're too in love with the SUV's delusion of safety.

 

[silbeej]

MPG all comes down to the efficiency of the combustion in the engine. As well as this, if the combustion of the engine is a lot more efficient, then emissions are a lot lower.

Well put. I guess i just don't understand why a company like Audi, would sell worse cars in the US than they do everywhere else. Also, i want the RS6 Avant to come over here, but that is besides the point.

 

[3nm]

Euro has a lot stricter emissions rules. As such the engines are slightly less powered, but also a lot more efficient.

one of the reasons that VW hasn't been selling TDi is b/c of the 50 states' emission standards (yes, it's weird - each state varies).

 

[skunk]

It should also be pointed out that UK consumption figures are based on Imperial gallons, while US consumption figures are based on US gallons, which are 20% smaller.

 

[silbeej]

It should also be pointed out that UK consumption figures are based on Imperial gallons, while US consumption figures are based on US gallons, which are 20% smaller.

Damn, that ruins my theory. But i think it still works out to a little better than our MPG.

 

[steveza]

Also, i want the RS6 Avant to come over here, but that is besides the point.

Because that's a fuel efficient vehicle

 

[MalcolmJID]

Well put. I guess i just don't understand why a company like Audi, would sell worse cars in the US than they do everywhere else. Also, i want the RS6 Avant to come over here, but that is besides the point.

People pay for it. It's business.

My roommate and I have just started discussing this. And in the US you can get a Ford Mustang STARTING at US$19k, which at current conversion rates is around £9k. I could only just buy a bottom of the range 1.25litre Ford Fiesta for that over here.

Also on the same advert, it boasted 19mpg/24hwy. I think that is absolutely ridiculous. While I understand the UK uses imperial gallons, and the US has US Gallons, and yes it's a sportscar, but for a car to have such a shocking fuel figure like that, I couldn't even begin to consider buying a car like that.



Perhaps I'm just a lot more cost conscious as here in the UK, fuel is approaching £5/gallon (over $10/gallon for my US counterparts), and as such fuel efficiency is very important to me.

 

[silbeej]

Because that's a fuel efficient vehicle

Actually, for what it offers, it really is. lol

But, i also checked out the VW site, and for a jetta, after the Uk gallon to Us gallon conversion, it gets 42.2MPG, where a US jetta will only get 21/29. It is terrible.


I guess we should just stop complaining, and if you can't afford enough fuel, get a bike. Fuel cells are going to rule all in a few years so we can just wait and see what happens. But there still is going to be nothing like a good old petrol roadster. Save your pennies everybody (or pence).

 

[carlgo]

European and Japanese cars that are sold in the US are designed by the same people that design cars for their home markets. If there is a mileage handicap for US models, it is because of the safety and emissions regulation. Nobody is trying for poor economy.

Diesels have pretty much been banned here, although Benz and Honda have designs that will pass and will be available next year. Unregulated diesels are not a good idea at all, despite good mileage, because of all the soot and pollution.

Many Americans do drive big cars and SUVs because they have the room, the view of the road and the safety. And they are just a lot nicer on long trips, especially in family situations. Most people will spend the extra on gas for those reasons.

 

[CalBoy]

All i wanted to know is why cars for say the UK market, get so much better fuel economy then cars for the US market.

The reason is because we don't have high taxes on gasoline in the US, which I'll explain below:

The US has lower standards when it comes to gas milage. In fact, I may be wrong, but we might have one of the lowest standards.

On the contrary, gas mileage standards in the US are high, yet, in extreme irony, we have the worst performing vehicles. Why? The reason is a lack of taxation on gasoline.

See, the CAFE standards introduced in 1975 enacted some basic fuel economy standards, and have been gradually upgraded since then. One would expect that this would lead to more fuel efficient cars on the road. Instead, car manufacturers add the cost of conforming to CAFE standards onto the price of a new car. This makes buying a new car seem more expensive, and makes consumers hold onto their older vehicles for longer.

Simultaneously, there is cheap fuel in the US because we have very little in the way of taxes on gasoline. Even in CA which has very high taxes on fuel relative to the rest of the US, gas is cheap. It is half the cost it would be in other developed nations. This means that consumers can afford to keep older and inefficient vehicles on the road for longer, and hence consume more fuel while pollute more at the same time.

If you want to know more, read a book by David Vogel. He's written several on the subject and is still doing research on the environmental policies of the US and the rest of the developed world.

He's also a very good lecturer.

Now that would disagree with a post from above, where the person stated that American has tighter restrictions than Europe. I would really like to see the facts on that one.

Again, read some stuff by Vogel. He's research is really very interesting.

 

[3nm]

The more fuel used, the more pollutants it produces.

not necessarily, ratio is important since everything is relative.

 

[Prof.]

based on this chart, doesn't it mean that the US has the lowest MPG standards?

 

[silbeej]

based on this chart, doesn't it mean that the US has the lowest MPG standards?

I believe this is what the average vehicle gets, not the standards. I saw this chart in my transportation engineering class. It was the average MPG for all the vehicles in a given country/area. The predicted numbers are what the law says vehicles must have in the future.

 

[garybUK]

The whole Diesel isn't clean argument is a crock, Americans just have truck diesel which is why it's not allowed in cars, cars here use CityDiesel which is a hellova lot cleaner and more efficient than petrol.

Also don't gorget a US gallon is different to a UK/European Gallon.

 

[robbieduncan]

A few people have posted that the US loves power. Which I disagree with: they love cylinders and capacity (ain't no replacement for displacement etc). American engines tend to be very "lazy": low output per litre. A performance vehicle in the UK would be expected to get at least 90bhp per litre: in the states it seems like it more like 50bhp or less.

A lot of this seems to come down to expectations in terms of cost of ownership. We don't think anything of having to have our cars serviced yearly or at every 15000 miles etc. In the US engines are designed to run for something like 100000 miles without a service so are in a much lower state of tune.

That, combined with the fact that the average person in Europe is happy with a sub 2-litre 4 cylinder car means we have much higher average mpg.

 

[CalBoy]

based on this chart, doesn't it mean that the US has the lowest MPG standards?

No, it just means that the average vehicle doesn't have high mpg.

If we're serious about changing it, we'd vote to implement a $2 tax/gallon on gasoline.

That, combined with the fact that the average person in Europe is happy with a sub 2-litre 4 cylinder car means we have much higher average mpg.

Well it's also in your economic interest to drive a more fuel efficient car. Even when gas prices are high, your price/US gallon is twice what we pay because of taxes. This forces drivers to either take public transit or buy the most fuel efficient car they can find.

In the US gas is still cheap enough where someone can make the conscious decision to drive something that gets 30 gallons to the mile.

 

[robbieduncan]

Well it's also in your economic interest to drive a more fuel efficient car. Even when gas prices are high, your price/US gallon is twice what we pay because of taxes. This forces drivers to either take public transit or buy the most fuel efficient car they can find.

Fuel prices are only part of the issue. We also have a highly punitive road-tax system. Every car on the road must have a tax-disc replaced yearly. The amount you pay is now linked to the amount of CO2 per km that your car generates (manufacturer figures). At the moment even the highest band (Band G) is bearable (£300 per year) but the government plans to raise the rapidly over the next few years. I have heard the target is £600 in the next 2-3 years. This is one of the factors behind me selling my Band F car (a 1.8l Mazda MX-5) and starting the hunt for a Band D car (a 1.8l Lotus Elise).

Some local councils have also started charging more for residents parking permits for Band G cars (yes, in some areas you have to pay for the right to park in the street).

 

[Gelfin]

Simultaneously, there is cheap fuel in the US because we have very little in the way of taxes on gasoline. Even in CA which has very high taxes on fuel relative to the rest of the US, gas is cheap. It is half the cost it would be in other developed nations.

This is an interesting hypothesis, but I hope you would not suggest increased fuel taxes as a remedy. The reason we do not tax fuel heavily is that fuel taxes are brutally regressive. The poorer a person is, the less likely he is to have the luxury of choosing where he lives relative to where he works. I am not saying the analysis is wrong, but raising taxes so high that people must replace their cars with more efficient models in order to afford fuel would have incredibly dire consequences when you consider how many people can barely afford the fuel they're putting in their very old cars already.

In the US engines are designed to run for something like 100000 miles without a service so are in a much lower state of tune.

I have no idea where you would have gotten this idea. If anything, Americans have been sold a bill of goods with regard to how often their cars need routine service. The "standard" pushed by dealers and mechanics here is to have service every three months or 3,000 miles. This is far more frequent than any car needs under any driving conditions.

It should also be pointed out that UK consumption figures are based on Imperial gallons, while US consumption figures are based on US gallons, which are 20% smaller.

This difference also applies to pints, which is just tragic.

 

[CalBoy]

Fuel prices are only part of the issue...

So in essence, the government is acting as a force in the demand market by reducing the demand for "American" style vehicles (and vehicles in general with parking restrictions and such).

That's something that's absent in most of America (NY and Chicago are exceptions, with SF as a sort of half-hearted follower).

This is an interesting hypothesis, but I hope you would not suggest increased fuel taxes as a remedy.

Actually, I am for that (and the hypothesis is actually David Vogel's ). When fuel prices spike, hybrid sales go up (and SUV sales go down). Why rely on oil cartels to advance a good cause? The government can do it via taxation.

However:

The reason we do not tax fuel heavily is that fuel taxes are brutally regressive. The poorer a person is, the less likely he is to have the luxury of choosing where he lives relative to where he works.

I don't disagree, however, with the funds coming in via taxation, we can invest in better public transit. Europe and Japan did this decades ago and are now much more resistant to oil shocks, multi-car pileups, and the other problems associated with a car-centric society. Granted not all cities can afford to have rail systems, but buses and trollies are easy enough to maintain. The trick is to just get enough people to believe that they're better off doing it.

This would also help the poor, as the poor have fewer options in regards to where they live and work. This means that they might have to travel very long distances, something that public transit can help them with (shorter trips generally subsidize longer ones in public transit fares).

 

[quagmire]

A few people have posted that the US loves power. Which I disagree with: they love cylinders and capacity (ain't no replacement for displacement etc). American engines tend to be very "lazy": low output per litre. A performance vehicle in the UK would be expected to get at least 90bhp per litre: in the states it seems like it more like 50bhp or less.

A lot of this seems to come down to expectations in terms of cost of ownership. We don't think anything of having to have our cars serviced yearly or at every 15000 miles etc. In the US engines are designed to run for something like 100000 miles without a service so are in a much lower state of tune.

That, combined with the fact that the average person in Europe is happy with a sub 2-litre 4 cylinder car means we have much higher average mpg.

Well that's because you guys are taxed on displacement as well. Anything above 3.0 liters I believe is taxed substantially. It isn't like the consumers expected it from automakers. The automakers don't want to be taxed which would force them to pass the cost to the consumer and have the more expensive vehicle. Now Euro consumers may expect a high HP/liter out of an engine as a result of the taxes, but not the other way around.

Also, we can see power drop substantially in the US now that the 35 MPG mandate by 2020 has been passed. Goodbye awesome cars.

 

[robbieduncan]

Well that's because you guys are taxed on displacement as well. Anything above 3.0 liters I believe is taxed substantially.

Not on displacement, only on CO2 production (for new cars). For older cars where there is no official manufacturer CO2 data then it's on displacement, but the 3.0l+ level is way lower than Band G for new cars.

 

[MacNut]

I have no idea where you would have gotten this idea. If anything, Americans have been sold a bill of goods with regard to how often their cars need routine service. The "standard" pushed by dealers and mechanics here is to have service every three months or 3,000 miles. This is far more frequent than any car needs under any driving conditions.

That is only for oil changes, and some say that you can wait till 5000 miles. The big tune ups happen at like 75,000-100,000.

 

[iGav]

Actually, for what it offers, it really is. lol

But, i also checked out the VW site, and for a jetta, after the Uk gallon to Us gallon conversion, it gets 42.2MPG, where a US jetta will only get 21/29. It is terrible.

Are you certain that the A4 and Jetta are of equal engine size for both countries?

There's potentially many variables, it's possible that there could well be a difference in testing procedures (do they take into account additional passengers? luggage or even if the A/C is switched on etc when testing) to establish the MPG figures, and what constitutes the urban, extra-urban and combined figures may well differ between the two countries, even though they're the same manufacturers.

Are octane numbers between our fuel and yours comparable too?