[home][rumors and news][model release matrix][dealer network][desktop calendar][exhaust notes][tov forums][links][search][sponsors][garage][login]

Tire Rack Upgrade Garage
 Search for a Dealer:
 Canadian Flag US Flag
 Honda Acura
 ZIP  
Honda HR-V Compact SUV to Join All-New 2015 Fit as Honda Expands Small Car Lineup
More.......................
Some thoughts, photos, and notes on the 2015 Acura TLX from the NYIAS show floor
More.......................
2015 Acura TLX Unveiled at the 2014 New York International Auto Show
More.......................
Video: TOV member catches a TLX prototype on dashcam!
More.......................
All New 2015 Honda Fit Designed to Top the Subcompact Class
More.......................
Honda set to show interesting new Concept at Beijing International Automotive Exhibition
More.......................
'HR-V' name confirmed for upcoming Fit-based 'urban sport utility'
More.......................
American Honda Announces Sales Results for March 2014
More.......................
General Talk --> Re: Acura Style Magazine - Out of touch?
Join Discussion......
NSX --> Re: Acura NSX....How it's going to be sold in the US
Join Discussion......
HondaMobilia --> Re: Tenshodo RA273 Engine
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: If there was a TLX Wagon
Join Discussion......
Today's Reading Links --> Re: Honda FY14 production / JP sales
Join Discussion......
Accord --> Re: 9th Generation Honda Accord Reviews
Join Discussion......
Today's Reading Links --> Re: USA Today article about Acura
Join Discussion......
Professional Motorsports --> Re: F1 - 2014 Chinese Grand Prix
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Place your bets-TLX. Fit, HR-V sales
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Acura NDX vs Lexus NX
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Honda set for a rocky road ahead in Europe
Join Discussion......
RDX --> Re: 2016 RDX Upgrade Predictions
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: TLX delayed till late summer.. Instead of May
Join Discussion......
Professional Motorsports --> Re: BTCC at Donington Park
Join Discussion......
MDX --> Re: 2015 MDX
Join Discussion......
TOV Photo Gallery: 2015 Honda Fit
Read Article....................
PR Photo Gallery: 2015 Honda Fit
Read Article....................
TOV Dyno Test: 2014 Accord Hybrid
Read Article....................
TOV Video: 2015 Acura TLX design Overview by Jared Hall
Read Article....................
PR Photo Gallery: 2014 Acura RLX Sport Hybrid
Read Article....................
PR Photo Gallery: 2015 Civic Type R Prototype
Read Article....................

[fancy] [flat] [simple]
  TOV News > Acura Debuts 2013 RDX and All-New ILX Sedan at Chicago Auto Show > > Re: Meanwhile over at BMW...

Viewing Threshold (What is this?)

Thread Page - 1 2 3 [4] 5
Author
    
owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-15-2012 15:24
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012-bmw-328i-sedan-manual-first-drive-reviews

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012-bmw-335i-sedan-test-review

Here are some initial Car and Driver reviews of both of the new models.

Just a couple of observations:

First, notice that they don't exactly slam the N20, but they don't exactly put it on the same perceived plane of luxury either. Not really "damning with faint praise," but they don't seem to be enthusiastic about it in some ways. This is similar to how the BMW fans I have talked to are reacting. Some just don't like it.

Second, notice that the starting price for the 328i is just a tick under $36,000. Add in one of the packages (Luxury, Modern, Sport) any color other than black or white, and the tech package (required for top end ILX features) and you are looking at just over $40,000 without destination charge. That puts a pretty sizeable gap between what a fully loaded ILX will cost and what a similarly equipped 328i will cost. Is the BMW better? That may be subjective, but I think there is a lot of room for the ILX too. Consequently, when specing a fully loaded 328i, the buyer could stretch about another 3K and have a TL 6MT SH-AWD, which is how the TL ends up getting compared to the 3 series.

For a car that is 23/34 EPA with a 6MT, and will be about 1 second faster to 60 and through the quarter, that may be worth it for some people. But, I think the ILX will offer a lot of features for the price, and likely similar MPG in the real world (albeit at a slower pace).
NSXman
Profile for NSXman
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-15-2012 15:50
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
owequitit wrote:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012-bmw-328i-sedan-manual-first-drive-reviews

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012-bmw-335i-sedan-test-review

Here are some initial Car and Driver reviews of both of the new models.

Just a couple of observations:

First, notice that they don't exactly slam the N20, but they don't exactly put it on the same perceived plane of luxury either. Not really "damning with faint praise," but they don't seem to be enthusiastic about it in some ways. This is similar to how the BMW fans I have talked to are reacting. Some just don't like it.

Second, notice that the starting price for the 328i is just a tick under $36,000. Add in one of the packages (Luxury, Modern, Sport) any color other than black or white, and the tech package (required for top end ILX features) and you are looking at just over $40,000 without destination charge. That puts a pretty sizeable gap between what a fully loaded ILX will cost and what a similarly equipped 328i will cost. Is the BMW better? That may be subjective, but I think there is a lot of room for the ILX too. Consequently, when specing a fully loaded 328i, the buyer could stretch about another 3K and have a TL 6MT SH-AWD, which is how the TL ends up getting compared to the 3 series.

For a car that is 23/34 EPA with a 6MT, and will be about 1 second faster to 60 and through the quarter, that may be worth it for some people. But, I think the ILX will offer a lot of features for the price, and likely similar MPG in the real world (albeit at a slower pace).



All valid points throughout your statements. One thought I had about the starting 3 series price is that this same engine is used in the Z4 and 528. They start in the high $40s and would likely end up in the mid to high $50s after it is all said and done. I don't think I am speaking out of place to say the 3-series (engine aside) is a higher end car than the ILX. If an ILX type car were to be powered by a 328 type engine from Honda, I think Honda could sell it for $25k, could they not?

I might have confused people when I brought up the 328, but I was more bringing up the engine in the 328. That type of engine in the 328 doesn't HAVE to cost $36,000. BMW is responding to mandates for fuel economy but they are also giving the users the power they expect from luxury cars. I understand the sacrifices going from a NA I6 to a turbo I4. While the feel has changed, BMW has still come back with a car that can perform.

That is all I am saying. For a luxury car that can break the 6 second 0-60 mark and get EPA ratings of the mid-30s...I am impressed with the progress at BMW.

Perhaps the initial fuel economy ratings of the Ford 2.0 Ecoboost might be a better measuring stick for what I am talking about. While I am sure some of the Fusion buyers like the 3.0 or 3.5 Duratec motors and some will not like the 2.0T in their new car...Ford is responding to the same mandates as Honda and they are bringing a new car to the market that in my opinion sacrifices little to gain more. 1 step back and 3 forward the way I see it.

That innovation is just not there in 2004-2012 Hondas and Acuras by and large. In previous years Honda was just on top of the innovation world and since then the world has caught up. If engineering wizardry has reached a plateau then fine, but I feel a general attitude at Honda that says "we have a loyal following and they will buy what ever we make." That attitude killed the Big 3.
NoSpinZone
Profile for NoSpinZone
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-15-2012 17:30
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
If I'm driving a FWD car that's smaller, worse-handling, 1 second slower to 60, and worse gas mileage, I better be saving $10k on it over something bigger, faster, nimbler and more efficient.

Unless the ILX gets significantly better than 20/29 in the real world and has some uncanny handling traits (LSD is almost a must), it is a fail, IMO. It looks good inside and out, IMO, and there are still questions to be answered, but I'm growing unbelievably impatient.

I suppose the ILX shouldn't count... I can't wait to see the Acura lineup in a few years.

PS, Motortrend seemed to love the 2.0. I tend to like N/A engines better, but it's up to those that know how to do great things with them to ACTUALLY DO GREAT THINGS WITH THEM, and prove the Forced Inductors wrong.
Hondarulez
Profile for Hondarulez
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-15-2012 17:59
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
$10k is a lot of money. My expectations would probably be very different....ie. ILX vs TL - 200hp vs 300hp, compact vs nearly full size, FWD vs SH-AWD, I4 vs V6, etc.
owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-15-2012 18:43
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
NSXman wrote:
owequitit wrote:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012-bmw-328i-sedan-manual-first-drive-reviews

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012-bmw-335i-sedan-test-review

Here are some initial Car and Driver reviews of both of the new models.

Just a couple of observations:

First, notice that they don't exactly slam the N20, but they don't exactly put it on the same perceived plane of luxury either. Not really "damning with faint praise," but they don't seem to be enthusiastic about it in some ways. This is similar to how the BMW fans I have talked to are reacting. Some just don't like it.

Second, notice that the starting price for the 328i is just a tick under $36,000. Add in one of the packages (Luxury, Modern, Sport) any color other than black or white, and the tech package (required for top end ILX features) and you are looking at just over $40,000 without destination charge. That puts a pretty sizeable gap between what a fully loaded ILX will cost and what a similarly equipped 328i will cost. Is the BMW better? That may be subjective, but I think there is a lot of room for the ILX too. Consequently, when specing a fully loaded 328i, the buyer could stretch about another 3K and have a TL 6MT SH-AWD, which is how the TL ends up getting compared to the 3 series.

For a car that is 23/34 EPA with a 6MT, and will be about 1 second faster to 60 and through the quarter, that may be worth it for some people. But, I think the ILX will offer a lot of features for the price, and likely similar MPG in the real world (albeit at a slower pace).



All valid points throughout your statements. One thought I had about the starting 3 series price is that this same engine is used in the Z4 and 528. They start in the high $40s and would likely end up in the mid to high $50s after it is all said and done. I don't think I am speaking out of place to say the 3-series (engine aside) is a higher end car than the ILX. If an ILX type car were to be powered by a 328 type engine from Honda, I think Honda could sell it for $25k, could they not?

I might have confused people when I brought up the 328, but I was more bringing up the engine in the 328. That type of engine in the 328 doesn't HAVE to cost $36,000. BMW is responding to mandates for fuel economy but they are also giving the users the power they expect from luxury cars. I understand the sacrifices going from a NA I6 to a turbo I4. While the feel has changed, BMW has still come back with a car that can perform.

That is all I am saying. For a luxury car that can break the 6 second 0-60 mark and get EPA ratings of the mid-30s...I am impressed with the progress at BMW.

Perhaps the initial fuel economy ratings of the Ford 2.0 Ecoboost might be a better measuring stick for what I am talking about. While I am sure some of the Fusion buyers like the 3.0 or 3.5 Duratec motors and some will not like the 2.0T in their new car...Ford is responding to the same mandates as Honda and they are bringing a new car to the market that in my opinion sacrifices little to gain more. 1 step back and 3 forward the way I see it.

That innovation is just not there in 2004-2012 Hondas and Acuras by and large. In previous years Honda was just on top of the innovation world and since then the world has caught up. If engineering wizardry has reached a plateau then fine, but I feel a general attitude at Honda that says "we have a loyal following and they will buy what ever we make." That attitude killed the Big 3.



It is the foundation of free choice and free market. Everything exists on a continuum, and it is up to the buyer to decide what fits best.

Like I said, my position is less about the impressiveness of the engine, and more about the relative acceptance among fans/enthusiasts. Much like Honda, BMW is currently taking all sorts of criticism for "losing their mojo" among enthusiasts. While the N20 is surely a good engine, IMO, it does not meet the perceived luxury boundary to which BMW buyers are accustomed. Doesn't make it a bad engine, or any less of an achievement, but does it necessarily make it a good thing? Again, subjective response.

As a long time BMW fan (the only thing keeping me out of one are geography and long term maintenance costs), I can sympathize with both end. The Honda fan in me certainly embraces a willing 4 banger, but the BMW side of me appreciates the older cars more to a degree.

As far as progress, I disagree to a large extent. You use Ford as an example, but keep in mind that the K series is on its last legs (Honda's entire engine lineup as a matter of fact), while Ford's and BMW's latest responses are brand new. The future will see what Honda brings, but honestly, the transition to small displacement boosted engines isn't really progress IMO. They are more complex, heavier, more costly, and in many cases aren't delivering real world economy based on EPA results. I am also less than enthusiastic about them being on boost pretty much all the time (a sacrifice to get the throttle response necessary, which is MUCH better these days), and am not as pleased with the smaller turbos (same ones that give good response) from choking the top end. Also, as of right now, I still don't see a huge advantage vs. say a good larger NA V6. Take a look at C&D's latest results for the 335i. It didn't manage a vastly superior 5-60, 0-100 or a 1/4 mile time than the TL, despite having essentially equal power and more torque, in a lighter package. It did get slightly better MPG than the averages I have seen for the 6MT TL at about 22MPG, but again, you have several hundred pounds of weight there. And all for nearly $56K. While the N55 looks good on paper, and is a good engine, is it really better than a slightly larger NA V6? Again, I present the point that it is better in PAPER EPA ratings. I understand that BMW is chasing the same mandate as everyone else, but IMO it merely serves to highlight the stupidity and short sightedness of the current political regime's green mandate. Looks great on paper, but doesn't really achieve the result where it matters. In short, it is another greeny feel good solution to a problem that doesn't exist, or politically people really don't want to fix. But damn if it isn't a good talking point. Interestingly, it is having the completely predictable and unintended (by those who pushed it) side effect of making car footprints larger. So it hasn't stopped the growth as automakers push size up to meet a lower mandated EPA value... The market speaks again. The upside for us though, is that it seems to working to reduce overhang and restore long wheelbase/short body proportions.

Also, as a caveat, it is possible that the 335i was slightly down on power, as C&D mentioned it was measurably slower than the last one they tested.

Like I said, I am not saying right/wrong as much as I am reflecting on the fact that despite its technological specs, BMW fans are VERY lukewarm about the engine.
owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-15-2012 18:52
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
NoSpinZone wrote:
If I'm driving a FWD car that's smaller, worse-handling, 1 second slower to 60, and worse gas mileage, I better be saving $10k on it over something bigger, faster, nimbler and more efficient.

Unless the ILX gets significantly better than 20/29 in the real world and has some uncanny handling traits (LSD is almost a must), it is a fail, IMO. It looks good inside and out, IMO, and there are still questions to be answered, but I'm growing unbelievably impatient.

I suppose the ILX shouldn't count... I can't wait to see the Acura lineup in a few years.

PS, Motortrend seemed to love the 2.0. I tend to like N/A engines better, but it's up to those that know how to do great things with them to ACTUALLY DO GREAT THINGS WITH THEM, and prove the Forced Inductors wrong.



The EXACT same arguement could be used in reverse. If I am paying $10-15K more than the ILX (depending on where it is priced) in a similar sized car with similar features and MPG, then it BETTER be faster and handle better.

Like I have said repeatedly. Don't be surprised to see well over 30MPG highway real world in the ILX. You can surf around this board and see the results, or you can go search around for real world Civic Si/TSX 6MT results. There is sufficient data to draw a conclusion. Whereas the data for the N20 is still pretty sparse, the information on 6MT versions of this K24 are not.

Also, to be honest, without a sport package, I don't doubt that the 328 will feel a lot better handling wise, but ultimate values might not be as far apart as you think. I have continually been unimpressed with non-sport equipped BMW limits. Granted, it is more about FEEL and having a proper FEELING chassis, but in terms of ultimate values, they tend to be over-rated. I also agree on the LSD. I think we may see it though, since it is targeted directly at enthusiasts, it is already in the Si, and it would ammortize supply costs a bit more. Then again, they could ditch it as an excuse to drop the price of the car by $500 which IMO would be a mistake.

C&D and Road and Track like the N20 also, as did Insideline. But they have all made mention of where it is inferior to the outgoing sixes. I know at least everyone but Motortrend did.

No comment about the planet I live on and the LSD in my Accord? ;)
NoSpinZone
Profile for NoSpinZone
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-15-2012 19:07
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
owe,

I didn't see the comment about LSD until just now (after you reminded me of my post).

I don't think I'd have the b@lls to do something like that. I love the idea of a 2009-2011 Civic Si except for what I believe to be too much techy & cab-forward dash and a bit too much hard plastic... I don't like that style. The ILX interior is awesome, so in a way I'm really hoping the mileage and handling works out.... cuz I tend to think the TSX is a little too frumpy and w/o a handling package I'm just not 100% behind jumping on that train.

That said, with earth dreams coming out and living in MN, a TL w/ eSH-AWD could be something I constantly regret not waiting for if I'm sitting in an ILX... so at this point I think I'll just sit back and wait.
adrianchew
Profile for adrianchew
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-15-2012 21:28
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
I hope people seeing all these new engines realize its more than just that... as much as I like the BMW N20 and think it is technologically a really nice showpiece, there's also the trickery like auto start/stop (which is why BMW fans should vomit at the new package).

Auto start/stop in a manual is pretty simple... shift into neutral at a stop, engine stops. Clutch in, and it starts up again... but no matter what, this is not going to be instant. Very unnatural.

Then again, Honda should be faulted for the abomination of a rev hang they've programmed into their electronic throttles. Pointless and insanely stupid, all for the sake of being a little bit greener.
owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-16-2012 01:41
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
NoSpinZone wrote:
owe,

I didn't see the comment about LSD until just now (after you reminded me of my post).

I don't think I'd have the b@lls to do something like that. I love the idea of a 2009-2011 Civic Si except for what I believe to be too much techy & cab-forward dash and a bit too much hard plastic... I don't like that style. The ILX interior is awesome, so in a way I'm really hoping the mileage and handling works out.... cuz I tend to think the TSX is a little too frumpy and w/o a handling package I'm just not 100% behind jumping on that train.

That said, with earth dreams coming out and living in MN, a TL w/ eSH-AWD could be something I constantly regret not waiting for if I'm sitting in an ILX... so at this point I think I'll just sit back and wait.



The Prelude powertrain is actually pretty much a bolt in affair with very few changes required. The only issues I had were the transmission mount because my car was auto, and the tranny mounts are different between auto and manual for 1990-1993. They make swap mounts now, but at the time they didn't. The only other part that didn't just hook right up was the high pressure PS line, which I just had modified with a high pressure hydraulic fitting with the Accord lower and Prelude upper. Worked perfectly. The wiring harness had to be adapted slightly (knock sensor and VTEC wiring), but again all relatively minor. Actually, most of the suspension is no longer stock, the interior has been changed with a black leather interior from a 1991 Accord SE (only year from that gen offered with black leather). I still love to do it, but I liked the Si because it was pretty much just as fast in stock form, and I wanted something that wasn't a rolling billboard for theft (and if it is, insurance won't ask questions).

Compared to trying to shoehorn a B series into a Dual Port Injection EF Civic, it was nothing. I also kept all working accessories, so the car still has working AC, Powersteering, etc. I do really miss the styling proportions of Hondas from that era. But I digress.

Also, I am sort of with you. Hopefully, the next TL will shrink a few inches, but keep the SH-AWD stuff and the 6MT. That would be a fantastic car. Saw an updated 2012 TL the other day, and it looks MUCH better than the 09-11 just due to the details being massaged.

Good luck either way.
Nick GravesX
Profile for Nick GravesX
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-16-2012 14:19
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
NSXman wrote:
owequitit wrote:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012-bmw-328i-sedan-manual-first-drive-reviews

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012-bmw-335i-sedan-test-review

Here are some initial Car and Driver reviews of both of the new models.

Just a couple of observations:

First, notice that they don't exactly slam the N20, but they don't exactly put it on the same perceived plane of luxury either. Not really "damning with faint praise," but they don't seem to be enthusiastic about it in some ways. This is similar to how the BMW fans I have talked to are reacting. Some just don't like it.

Second, notice that the starting price for the 328i is just a tick under $36,000. Add in one of the packages (Luxury, Modern, Sport) any color other than black or white, and the tech package (required for top end ILX features) and you are looking at just over $40,000 without destination charge. That puts a pretty sizeable gap between what a fully loaded ILX will cost and what a similarly equipped 328i will cost. Is the BMW better? That may be subjective, but I think there is a lot of room for the ILX too. Consequently, when specing a fully loaded 328i, the buyer could stretch about another 3K and have a TL 6MT SH-AWD, which is how the TL ends up getting compared to the 3 series.

For a car that is 23/34 EPA with a 6MT, and will be about 1 second faster to 60 and through the quarter, that may be worth it for some people. But, I think the ILX will offer a lot of features for the price, and likely similar MPG in the real world (albeit at a slower pace).



All valid points throughout your statements. One thought I had about the starting 3 series price is that this same engine is used in the Z4 and 528. They start in the high $40s and would likely end up in the mid to high $50s after it is all said and done. I don't think I am speaking out of place to say the 3-series (engine aside) is a higher end car than the ILX. If an ILX type car were to be powered by a 328 type engine from Honda, I think Honda could sell it for $25k, could they not?

I might have confused people when I brought up the 328, but I was more bringing up the engine in the 328. That type of engine in the 328 doesn't HAVE to cost $36,000. BMW is responding to mandates for fuel economy but they are also giving the users the power they expect from luxury cars. I understand the sacrifices going from a NA I6 to a turbo I4. While the feel has changed, BMW has still come back with a car that can perform.

That is all I am saying. For a luxury car that can break the 6 second 0-60 mark and get EPA ratings of the mid-30s...I am impressed with the progress at BMW.

Perhaps the initial fuel economy ratings of the Ford 2.0 Ecoboost might be a better measuring stick for what I am talking about. While I am sure some of the Fusion buyers like the 3.0 or 3.5 Duratec motors and some will not like the 2.0T in their new car...Ford is responding to the same mandates as Honda and they are bringing a new car to the market that in my opinion sacrifices little to gain more. 1 step back and 3 forward the way I see it.

That innovation is just not there in 2004-2012 Hondas and Acuras by and large. In previous years Honda was just on top of the innovation world and since then the world has caught up. If engineering wizardry has reached a plateau then fine, but I feel a general attitude at Honda that says "we have a loyal following and they will buy what ever we make." That attitude killed the Big 3.



Ah - that makes sense now.

The dichotomy is interesting; Honda seems so have rejected turbos and the Nice Dreams tech seems rather conventional. The fact is, it's just not ready quite yet, for economic & tectonic reasons.

Either way, BMW turbos (diseasels) have proved unreliable and expensive, so a regular engine running part-atki cycle through a CVT might be better (if more boring!) in the long run. Jury's out.

Certainly that, plus the awful steering afflicting just about every modern car, has BMW fans out looking for lost mojos. They found one with a trapezoidal H on it, but chucked it as it wasn't what they were looking for...

The ILX is a cheaper car; it's based off a Civ plank and sits below the F30 in many ways. However, I've said elsewhere that one stuffed up with the old RDX oily bits (and a re-tuned 2.3T engine) ought to make an excellent all-weather sports saloon and a model that Hondura has so obviously missed out on. So a 328-type engine's not a bad idea...

Whether it's practicable/feasible/makes it on numbers/corporate philisophy I dunno.
CarPhreakD
Profile for CarPhreakD
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-16-2012 19:23
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Speaking of the N20, IL sent their BMW 3-series over to do a dyno test.

Not exactly a soulful engine, as torque is high and then continually drops off (once the torque and hp curves cross, horsepower plateaus from 5250 RPM to 7000 rpm). But the thing made the same amount of peak power over a larger range than the Sonata's much vaunted 274hp 2.0t (which made its peak power at the end of its rev range). It's pretty impressive since it was making its rated 240hp at the wheels.
Honda-D
Profile for Honda-D
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-16-2012 23:39
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
CarPhreakD wrote:
Speaking of the N20, IL sent their BMW 3-series over to do a dyno test.

Not exactly a soulful engine, as torque is high and then continually drops off (once the torque and hp curves cross, horsepower plateaus from 5250 RPM to 7000 rpm). But the thing made the same amount of peak power over a larger range than the Sonata's much vaunted 274hp 2.0t (which made its peak power at the end of its rev range). It's pretty impressive since it was making its rated 240hp at the wheels.



sounds like 335i is faster on straights but 328i is faster on corners.

Interesting. But sounds like the hype machine for BMW is dialed up to 11.
jero
Profile for jero
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-17-2012 03:48
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Owe,

Just to clarify... although the ILX is epa rated at 20/29, you think real world mpg will be as high as 29/35?

Average driver, average terrain. Exceeding the epa by nearly 50% in the city?
owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-18-2012 01:49
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
jero wrote:
Owe,

Just to clarify... although the ILX is epa rated at 20/29, you think real world mpg will be as high as 29/35?

Average driver, average terrain. Exceeding the epa by nearly 50% in the city?



Realistically, there are too many drivers and conditions to pigeon hole an "average" driver. However, if you look at larger data sets, you can ascertain a statistical average that is representative of an "average" driver, or many average drivers.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=19749

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=21962

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=23570

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=26250

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=25235

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=24810

I chose these cars for some specific reasons.

The first 3 I chose because we have had 2 7th gen Accord V6's, so I have quite a bit of first hand knowledge on what they did MPG wisevs their "ratings."

I chose the 09 Si, because I also have personal experience with it.

I chose the TSX, because while it is a limited data sample, in and of itself, you can see a bit what people are getting. There are also a number of comparison tests, instrumented tests and long term tests that all draw conclusions about MPG. Since the powertrain is essentially the same as the ILX, it seems like it would make for a valid comparison. Unfortunately, fueleconomy.gov doesn't have anythign available yet for the 2012 Si. It is also possible you could find more data from sites like edmunds.com, but I didn't look there.

I included the final year of the last gen 328i, for comparison to the new 328i.

Before I discuss anything, a few caveats. First, some of the cars have a limited sampling pool. The 328i and the TSX both have 2. The 2007 Accord is 1, but the 2006 with an identical powertrain is 20, and the 2004/2005 with a very similar powertrain is an additional 41 cars. The Civic Si's have a lot of data.

Now, as for the Accords. Our 2004 is rated 18/27 per the EPA. In CITY driving, it would return about 26-27MPG routinely. On the highway, at 80MPH, it would return about 32-33 MPG. So we were beating our highway estimates by about 20%. Our city value was beating its EPA value by nearly 50%. That is over roughly ~90,000 miles of driving and still counting. Our 2006 which we no longer have (it was leased) turned in pretty much identical mileage (+/- 1MPG or so) under the same conditions for about 40,000 miles. So it was actually beating its EPA estimates by a larger value, since it was rated 1 MPG lower in both scenarios. On fueleconomy.gov, they only do "combined" and that is beating its EPA value by 18% in the case of the 04 and the 06 is beating it by 13%. For the "combined" comparison, I used the mean of the reported owner values. Interestingly, notice that the lowest reported 2004 value beat the EPA pure city value by 16%. In this particular case, I think it is pretty illustrative that not only were these Accords capable of BEATING EPA, but at least in my experience, they absolutely clobbered it, return CITY values that were very close the to rated HIGHWAY values for the car. The highway values were really unbelievable for a car of this size and performance. If a V6 powered car with an extra couple hundred pounds and more frontal area/drag can make those numbers, then I don't think it is nearly impossible for the ILX to do it. If the ILX can manage 20% over its rated highway value, then it will be sitting right at 35MPG.

In the case of my 09 Si, I am averaging about 29-30 MPG combined with about 80 city/20 highway. In the winter it dips slightly to about 27MPG due to longer and more frequent warm up cycles. Notice that is consistent with the average delivered according to fueleconomy.gov. For comparison, the HIGHWAY MPG rating on this car is 29, and the City rating is 23. Even in solid city driving, if I drive normally, I still see around 29. I did 4 days in LA city traffic and was still at 29MPG. I don't drive like a lunatic all of the time, but I do accelerate briskly when needed, I tend to flow about 5MPH over the limit, and I am not shy with a little enthusiastic VTEC now and again. FYI, that puts me about 26% over the city rating. I also live in mountainous terrain, and do a lot of hill climbing where I live, so I don't think the ~29 is because I have an "easy" drive. I do live at high altitude (5000-6000 MSL), but don't get much variance regardless of elevation as long as I maintain a consistent driving style. Highway, I routinely pull about 32MPG, but have seen as high as 34 at a steady 80MPH with large elevation changes. I chalk that up to the gearing, which keeps the engine humming pretty well at those speeds. That is reliably 10-15% above my highway MPG rating.

The TSX results average nearly 29MPG despite a city rating of 20MPG and a combined rating of 25. That is a 26% advantage. Again, it isn't hard to find documented highway results of 32-34MPG which would be a 15-25% advantage.

Put the same powertrain in a car weighing a couple hundred pounds lighter, an inch shorter, several inches narrower, and ~8-10" shorter, and I think it is a pretty safe bet that MPG won't be worse than the TSX. Considering that some have reported the 12 Si outperforming the 06-11 Si, with some reports of 32-34MPG highway, and I think it is safe to say that the ILX will probably be able to achieve something in the vicinity of 32-33 without much effort. Not only is that better than EPA, but it is better than MT's real world result with the 328i on a 300 mile 80MPH highway slog. Yes, the BMW is faster, but it is also a lot more expensive. I am really interested to see what results pop up for the N20 in the 3 series because I would like to know how it actually compares to the old I6 engines in the E90/E92 3 series. I think the EPA disparity will appear more impressive than the actual results. Yes, the car is a bit faster, and may even get better MPG, but will it be enough to justify the changes in character? It is an interesting question that should be fun to see play out.

Like I said, my position isn't based on conjecture. There is a lot of data out there to support MANY Honda products cleanly beating EPA. Are they only ones to ever beat EPA? No. But with few exceptions they tend to over-deliver in that regard, and that is IMO why people focus too much on EPA. They always try to win it on both fronts. When another car is able to beat EPA, or gets a good EPA score, then the product is simply a stellar achievement. When Honda beats EPA, it is "no big deal" because car XYZ does too. When they get a good EPA rating, it is never good enough, and when they don't it is horrible, irregardless what it delivers on the real road. It is one of the typical anti-Honda biased double standards. And sorry, while other cars may beat EPA, how many can beat it by an average of 15-20% or more all the time? We have had exactly 1 Honda that didn't always cleanly beat its rated values. That is our 2009 Accord EX-L V6, and IMO it is because of VCM (the TSX weighs about the same, has far superior power AND manages to deliver about the same real world MPG). Even the 09 mostly meets them, so it can't exactly be labeled a "disappointment."
carcrazy84
Profile for carcrazy84
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-19-2012 01:25
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Owe, if you look around that site, most cars get above the EPA combined rating regardless of the brand, especially older cars after the 2008 revision.

If you think about the type of person who would post their mileage on the site and similar sites, it's likely going to be people who are satisfied, even proud of their mileage. The same goes for people sharing their great mileage on forums or whatever. They probably wouldn't be so eager to share it if was average. Call it the "proud owner bias."

Plus people who keep track of their mileage are probably more likely to be conscientious about how they drive.

So, while you can take something from the numbers, it hardly means anything versus something like a random sampling of owners, or a more controlled test.
owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-19-2012 22:59
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
carcrazy84 wrote:
Owe, if you look around that site, most cars get above the EPA combined rating regardless of the brand, especially older cars after the 2008 revision.

If you think about the type of person who would post their mileage on the site and similar sites, it's likely going to be people who are satisfied, even proud of their mileage. The same goes for people sharing their great mileage on forums or whatever. They probably wouldn't be so eager to share it if was average. Call it the "proud owner bias."

Plus people who keep track of their mileage are probably more likely to be conscientious about how they drive.

So, while you can take something from the numbers, it hardly means anything versus something like a random sampling of owners, or a more controlled test.



I never claimed any of those things.

However, "beating" the mileage is not the same in all cases. If I get 1% over, then I am technically beating the estimate, but not by 20%.

The reality is that on cruise with the car at 75-80MPH, the examples I gave beat their estimates by ~20%. That often included a long climb from ~1,000 MSL up to 5,000MSL, back down to 4,000, up to nearly 6,000 and then back down to 5,000, so it isn't like they were on flat level ground in perfectly ideal conditions. In many cases the car was also loaded quite heavily.

The reality is that statistically, you can look around on sites like Edmunds.com, fueleconomy.gov etc and find a realistic sample of what people are doing. To assume that everyone is lying, inflating, or only reporting when they are happy is silly. Statistically, it all averages out over a large sample, and people are actually MORE likely to complain when they are dissatisfied. When statisticians come up with population values, the ONLY way to do that is to do a lot of sampling and then average it. The "averages" and "norms" are not random. That is specifically why I declared the notation about sample sizes in my post. The smaller the sample, the more likelihood of error, although that doesn't necessarily render it invalid, it just has to be considered as a potential source of error.

Finally, regardless what people report, it doesn't change my real world experience with all of our Hondas over the years beating their highway estimates by 10-20% under less than perfect road and driving conditions.

P.S. Note that while my experience is not their experience with EPA, most of those same groups reported BETTER than highway EPA with the TSX (similar powertrain, more weight), and less than EPA with the 328i. In MT's case, they were 14% below EPA on that 300 mile highway jaunt. So while, your point about fueleconomy.gov has some merit, it doesn't really sink the point of the argument, especially since I mentioned sample size.
carcrazy84
Profile for carcrazy84
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-20-2012 01:59
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Take a look at the mileage recorded on fueleconomy.gov for as many different cars as you like, especially pre-2008 cars. In my experience at least 8 out of 10 cars will have better than the EPA combined number, often by several mpg. You'll see what I mean.

And the sample sizes are actually really small for most cars. Regardless, more anecdotal fuel economy reports does not necessarily make a more accurate mean. It can show a trend or bias, however...

Think a little deeper about the human variable in these statistics.

Wouldn't you agree that people who spend time logging their mileage are probably trying to get better mileage? Wouldn't you agree that someone posting their mileage on that website are more likely to be satisfied with it, maybe even proud, than otherwise? Keep in mind that site isn't for complaints. There is nowhere to write a complaint for people to see, so why bother? It's for logging your mileage and looking at other logs, among other things. You're going to see a bias of higher mpg on the site. And with the older cars, I think you're seeing some of the EPA's math not adding up in the down-revision, which makes the owner's numbers look even better.

I know you really want this to support your belief that Hondas get better mileage than other cars, but it really doesn't.


carcrazy84
Profile for carcrazy84
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-20-2012 02:11
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
To be clear, I don't disagree that findings from other sources like Edmunds, Consumer Reports, and the car rags do seem to show that Hondas tend to beat the EPA numbers more than other brands. And I don't question your personal experience. My theory only involves fueleconomy.gov and sites like it.
Hondarulez
Profile for Hondarulez
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-20-2012 14:39
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
On the other hand, I think there are also people who want to show how their cars are NOT even close to meeting the EPA figures..and proceed to record and post those figures....so..two sides to that argument...?
carcrazy84
Profile for carcrazy84
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-20-2012 15:08
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Possibly, but the numbers on the site don't show that. People want sympathy, or help from other owners, or a way to vent if they have bad mileage. The site doesn't offer any of those.
GoFaster
Profile for GoFaster
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-20-2012 15:25
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
How has BMW created 240hp, 24/36mpg gasoline Powertrain with a 3 series 50/50 chassis? WTF have they done? Is this the biggest leap forward since the Prius? How do they get 36 mpg AND 0-60 in 5.6 seconds with refinement that leaves the reviewers gushing?

BMW has stunned me with this car, and since diesel has 30% more energy than gasoline what can we expect from their next diesel setup? Sort of floors you right. 31/47 with OOODLES of torque? That is just a simple math guess, but my goodness.

You would expect the review to tell a different story from the numbers, but instead the authors gush about what they just drove. Well Acura, you better empower your engineers because this is getting embarrassing. Sure BMWs are priced out of sight, but I can't argue with their claim of being the Ultimate Driving Machine.

I was expecting a 'drive it like you stole it' type of review to wring out the performance, but nope is just a giant technology jump forward.


P54
Profile for P54
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-20-2012 16:34
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
GoFaster wrote:
How has BMW created 240hp, 24/36mpg gasoline Powertrain with a 3 series 50/50 chassis? WTF have they done? Is this the biggest leap forward since the Prius? How do they get 36 mpg AND 0-60 in 5.6 seconds with refinement that leaves the reviewers gushing?

BMW has stunned me with this car, and since diesel has 30% more energy than gasoline what can we expect from their next diesel setup? Sort of floors you right. 31/47 with OOODLES of torque? That is just a simple math guess, but my goodness.

You would expect the review to tell a different story from the numbers, but instead the authors gush about what they just drove. Well Acura, you better empower your engineers because this is getting embarrassing. Sure BMWs are priced out of sight, but I can't argue with their claim of being the Ultimate Driving Machine.

I was expecting a 'drive it like you stole it' type of review to wring out the performance, but nope is just a giant technology jump forward.





Remember that BMW says themselves that they have gone all out with their technology. Honda has not done that , they have a lot more in store.
owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-20-2012 17:02
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
carcrazy84 wrote:
Take a look at the mileage recorded on fueleconomy.gov for as many different cars as you like, especially pre-2008 cars. In my experience at least 8 out of 10 cars will have better than the EPA combined number, often by several mpg. You'll see what I mean.

And the sample sizes are actually really small for most cars. Regardless, more anecdotal fuel economy reports does not necessarily make a more accurate mean. It can show a trend or bias, however...

Think a little deeper about the human variable in these statistics.

Wouldn't you agree that people who spend time logging their mileage are probably trying to get better mileage? Wouldn't you agree that someone posting their mileage on that website are more likely to be satisfied with it, maybe even proud, than otherwise? Keep in mind that site isn't for complaints. There is nowhere to write a complaint for people to see, so why bother? It's for logging your mileage and looking at other logs, among other things. You're going to see a bias of higher mpg on the site. And with the older cars, I think you're seeing some of the EPA's math not adding up in the down-revision, which makes the owner's numbers look even better.

I know you really want this to support your belief that Hondas get better mileage than other cars, but it really doesn't.





In order for your theory to hold water, it essentially has to live on the assumption that everybody is reporting inaccurately. In the cases of my experience, that is not true. For instance, the 2009 Si reports on fueleconomy.gov line up with mine to within 1MPG. I would hardly call that some astronomical over-reporting by owners. Same thing with the other results I posted. They are NOT over-inflated versus what other people are/have reported, or what I have achieved on my own. My opinion on the matter is that people automatically dismiss information they don't want to see/hear, regardless how reflective of reality it is. They see Honda's killing their EPA estimates, so they dismiss it. I gave the examples of 4 cars that aren't averaged incorrectly there. You have my experience, which is averaged over 40K in the case of the Civic, 140K in the case of the Accord V6's, and Jeff's reports of the TSX, as well as C&D etc, should you choose to verify it. The most common technique is miles driven/gallons used, and over many tankfulls, it DOES provide an accurate result.

Also, as you average larger statistical numbers, yes, you DO get more valid results. That isn't to say that there is zero error, because there is not such thing. However, if you average results over thousands of users, then you get a pretty accurate sample, because some over report, some under report, but most tend to be pretty accurate.

Besides, completely neglecting FE.gov, you still have a fair bit of data showing that the K24 6MT combo provides BETTER than 30MPG in the TSX, which is heavier and larger. It is unlikely that the ILX will do worse, despite the slightly lower gearing as a result of smaller tires. So that brings us right back to the core of my initial arguement that I think people are going to quickly find that the MPG of the ILX is under-rated. This physics stuff works, and with the Si already outperforming the TSX by a fair bit (apparently 2-3 MPG highway), the ILX with an identical powertrain should split the difference. Thus, even if it only returns what the TSX returns, it is STILL beating its EPA number by 10-15%.

To much focus on other supporting evidence, and not on the original point.

P.S. Fuel economy results aren't "anecdotal" because you didn't measure them. I use the conventionally accepted method for measurement, average it over many tanks, and I am getting results directly in line with what is being reported on fueleconomy.gov. I find it hard to believe that the results are merely "anecdotal" and are not accurately measured, because mine are accurately measured. Keep in mind too, that most Honda cars REQUIRED manual calculation because until recently, they didn't have the trip computers equipped that measured it for them. Sometimes those are slightly inflated, but not always. I just don't accept that their data is inherently flawed because you don't like it.
Hondarulez
Profile for Hondarulez
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-20-2012 17:56
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
GoFaster wrote:
How has BMW created 240hp, 24/36mpg gasoline Powertrain with a 3 series 50/50 chassis? WTF have they done? Is this the biggest leap forward since the Prius? How do they get 36 mpg AND 0-60 in 5.6 seconds with refinement that leaves the reviewers gushing?

BMW has stunned me with this car, and since diesel has 30% more energy than gasoline what can we expect from their next diesel setup? Sort of floors you right. 31/47 with OOODLES of torque? That is just a simple math guess, but my goodness.

You would expect the review to tell a different story from the numbers, but instead the authors gush about what they just drove. Well Acura, you better empower your engineers because this is getting embarrassing. Sure BMWs are priced out of sight, but I can't argue with their claim of being the Ultimate Driving Machine.

I was expecting a 'drive it like you stole it' type of review to wring out the performance, but nope is just a giant technology jump forward.






Energy Densities:
Gasoline (Petrol): 34MJ/L
Diesel: 38.6MJ/L

Difference: 13.5%


Anyways, this is one of the reasons why many automakers are getting into the turbo bandwagon.

With the soft EPA highway cycle, there's no aggressive acceleration at all. Taking the N20 as an example, there will be mild acceleration from time to time during the cycle, boost is not needed at all. The engine effectively works as a 2.0L NA engine cruising in 8th gear. Weight isn't too much of a factor when cruising at or near constant velocity. Combine with good aerodynamics, and you get good EPA highway mpg number.

This does not take into account any slight slope on the highway, or the fact that the driver might be speeding a bit (say, 70mph at a 60mph zone), or any passing manoeuvres. As soon as those come into place.....the engine might have to shift down and/or go into boost. This will increase the air going into the engine, and more fuel being burnt - end result, lower mpg. Of course this won't get reflected in the EPA figure. This is probably why Motortrend only managed to get 30.6mpg on the highway in the 328i, and 16mpg during aggressive driving.
carcrazy84
Profile for carcrazy84
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-20-2012 20:24
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
My opinion on the matter is that people automatically dismiss information they don't want to see/hear, regardless how reflective of reality it is.


Yes, that seems to be what is happening here.

As far as your experience, I'm not saying the numbers are necessarily inaccurate. But then you are likely a more conscientious driver like those who post on that site.

Here are some comparisons that include a Honda product:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=24320&id=25916&id=22822&id=28572

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=21999&id=22957&id=20871&id=26007

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=29500&id=20735&id=24877&id=25869

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=24276&id=20875&id=25223&id=29660

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=23252&id=24895&id=31018&id=22401

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=20526&id=29501&id=22749&id=30627

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=21864&id=23553&id=26412&id=26511

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=23173&id=31189&id=25915&id=26447

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=25472&id=28770&id=22860&id=22180

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=20770&id=28572&id=25287&id=24051

PS- These numbers are the definition of anecdotal because they weren't obtained under controlled scientific conditions, and they're reported by anonymous people who are not subject to any accountability.

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-21-2012 01:38
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
carcrazy84 wrote:
My opinion on the matter is that people automatically dismiss information they don't want to see/hear, regardless how reflective of reality it is.


Yes, that seems to be what is happening here.

As far as your experience, I'm not saying the numbers are necessarily inaccurate. But then you are likely a more conscientious driver like those who post on that site.

Here are some comparisons that include a Honda product:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=24320&id=25916&id=22822&id=28572

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=21999&id=22957&id=20871&id=26007

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=29500&id=20735&id=24877&id=25869

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=24276&id=20875&id=25223&id=29660

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=23252&id=24895&id=31018&id=22401

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=20526&id=29501&id=22749&id=30627

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=21864&id=23553&id=26412&id=26511

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=23173&id=31189&id=25915&id=26447

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=25472&id=28770&id=22860&id=22180

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=20770&id=28572&id=25287&id=24051

PS- These numbers are the definition of anecdotal because they weren't obtained under controlled scientific conditions, and they're reported by anonymous people who are not subject to any accountability.




In and of themselves they are "anecdotal." But when put together, over many experiential observations, they become less anecdotal, because individual variablility is mathematically reduced. That is why sample size is so important. If I have 1 million anecdotal observations, and then calculate a mean, the data is anecdotal, but the mean is not as much anecdotal. This is how they determine population means. To some degree, anecdotal observation is just as valuable and meaningful as controlled experimentation, as long as its potential errors are known. Scientific observation is also very limited, in that outside of whatever rigid circumstances the testing is conducted in, it is also full of validity issues and error. The real best data is a collection of the two. Usually, scientific observation (such as the test) to form an idea of what should happen, which is then hopefully substantiated by real world observations. Again, going back to the idea of anecdotal observation, over a large enough sample, it will consider a much broader range of conditions than experimentation ever could.

Also, you are still attempting to downplay the viability of real world data. You are ASSUMING that I MUST be a more conscientious driver because my results match theirs. I think you have no basis for making such a claim that only "conscientious" people post on that site, and you certainly are not basing your claim of me being "conscientious" on anything other than speculation. If anything, I am less MPG conscientious than the average person. I don't necessarily drive for MPG, nor do I avoid frequent enjoyment of the upper reaches of my tach. I use some basic techniques in normal driving, but nothing that would be beyond what a "normal" driver would use to achieve their MPG. At best, I do a better job of maintaining a constant speed, but little else. Also, I know for a fact that I drive more enthusiastically more frequently than an "average" driver.

P.S. Your comparisons are invalid for several reasons. I didn't have a chance to look at each and every one, but you are posting cars from differing classes, sizes, missions etc. If you wanted a valid comparison, it would be 10 links with identical cars. How an Escape is valid compared to an Accord and an Elantra is beyond me.

Also, it doesn't change the fact that based on observed results, the ILX is STILL likely to clear its EPA rating by a fair margin. Going back to my original point, and back on topic, regardless how any other cars do in the grand scheme of the universe (the 328i included), based on the ILX powertrain's performance in the Si and the TSX, the ILX should have no problem achieving low to mid 30's MPG highway. I have said repeatedly that there is not enough data yet to compare the ILX's performance to the 328i which is the real root of the discussion. The only data I have seen so far is the MT test with a result of 30.6MPG over a 75-80MPH slog vs the EPA rated 36MPG. Since it doesn't account for terrain, a variety of drivers, conditions, etc., I have not used it as irrefutable proof of the 328's performance.

Finally, the problem with fueleconomy.gov, that I considered yesterday is that it only provides what would equate to a "combined" average. It would be nice if they could break it out further, but that would require too much data collection on the part of the reporting users, so I understand why they don't.
carcrazy84
Profile for carcrazy84
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-21-2012 14:53
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Sorry, I wasn't trying to actually compare the models in the "comparisons." That is the only way to show multiple models on the site. The point was to show the sheer number of cars you can find where owners are beating the EPA numbers. I just selected cars I could think of at the moment that had reports.

At this point, I'm starting to question the EPA's numbers, and whether they accurately reflect our driving habits. The combined number is based on 55%city/45% highway driving, but maybe it should be the other way around. Anyway enough of this diversion.
Hondarulez
Profile for Hondarulez
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-21-2012 15:49
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
you guys probably just have to agree to disagree....
owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-21-2012 20:28
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
carcrazy84 wrote:
Sorry, I wasn't trying to actually compare the models in the "comparisons." That is the only way to show multiple models on the site. The point was to show the sheer number of cars you can find where owners are beating the EPA numbers. I just selected cars I could think of at the moment that had reports.

At this point, I'm starting to question the EPA's numbers, and whether they accurately reflect our driving habits. The combined number is based on 55%city/45% highway driving, but maybe it should be the other way around. Anyway enough of this diversion.



Interestingly, if you go to the EPA's website and actually take a look at the testing regimen, you will see why many of us dismiss it. It is NOT reflective of actual driving, unfortunately. What could promise to be a good test with real world validity is reduced to a shadow of what it could be with it being essentially based on a 30-40 year old test, with patchwork changes to address specific issues. The city cycle part of the test involves low speeds, ridiculous acceleration etc, and the highway portion is very short, and top out at a very low speed (right around 60MPH IIRC). The biggest problem with the EPA test, is that because of its limited testing range, it is really easy to game the test. For instance, GM making their trannies shift into top gear at 30MPH makes the EPA value LOOK better because of the low speeds. Boosted, small displacement engines also do well because they can be setup to keep RPM's very low, stay below the boost threshold, and thus skew the numbers higher because it is essentially behaving as a small displacement NA engine. To be clear, I don't think boosted engines are failing to deliver as well on the EPA test because the technology is inherently flawed. I think they do well because the circumstances of the test keep them in an operating range that is not really indicative of what most people will do or see in the real world. Once those engines start boosting, they ARE slightly more efficient than an equivalent NA V6 or other powerplant of equivalent performance, but they are not as much so as the test results from the EPA indicate.

More than anything, yes, the EPA test is flawed.
JP
Profile for JP
Re: Meanwhile over at BMW... [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-21-2012 21:55
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
owequitit wrote:
carcrazy84 wrote:
Sorry, I wasn't trying to actually compare the models in the "comparisons." That is the only way to show multiple models on the site. The point was to show the sheer number of cars you can find where owners are beating the EPA numbers. I just selected cars I could think of at the moment that had reports.

At this point, I'm starting to question the EPA's numbers, and whether they accurately reflect our driving habits. The combined number is based on 55%city/45% highway driving, but maybe it should be the other way around. Anyway enough of this diversion.



Interestingly, if you go to the EPA's website and actually take a look at the testing regimen, you will see why many of us dismiss it. It is NOT reflective of actual driving, unfortunately. What could promise to be a good test with real world validity is reduced to a shadow of what it could be with it being essentially based on a 30-40 year old test, with patchwork changes to address specific issues. The city cycle part of the test involves low speeds, ridiculous acceleration etc, and the highway portion is very short, and top out at a very low speed (right around 60MPH IIRC). The biggest problem with the EPA test, is that because of its limited testing range, it is really easy to game the test. For instance, GM making their trannies shift into top gear at 30MPH makes the EPA value LOOK better because of the low speeds. Boosted, small displacement engines also do well because they can be setup to keep RPM's very low, stay below the boost threshold, and thus skew the numbers higher because it is essentially behaving as a small displacement NA engine. To be clear, I don't think boosted engines are failing to deliver as well on the EPA test because the technology is inherently flawed. I think they do well because the circumstances of the test keep them in an operating range that is not really indicative of what most people will do or see in the real world. Once those engines start boosting, they ARE slightly more efficient than an equivalent NA V6 or other powerplant of equivalent performance, but they are not as much so as the test results from the EPA indicate.

More than anything, yes, the EPA test is flawed.



To me GM does not fool me with EPA MPaGic #'s, they just fool them selves, like the guy that does a red light, and thinks that is fooling the law... but actually he is just fooling himself.
That's called denial.

They are so desperate to sell that they "do magic" with the horrendous tranny gears lol. But people is getting smarter to believe those tales...

BTW, the ONLY car that I ever matched EPA (revised numbers 08) is the 95 Accord VTEC 5speed in Highway, 28 mpg, at 85 mph. No matter what (windy or not, A/C or no A/C), it always returned 28 mpg around 85 mph.

It would be gr8 if EPA shows 2 results: Senior Driving Habits and Spirited Driving Habits.
And then I will see those castles constructed in the air, falling all the way down to the reality.
 
Thread Page - 1 2 3 [4] 5
Contact TOV | Submit Your Article | Submit Your Link | Advertise | TOV Shop | Events | Our Sponsors | TOV Archives
Copyright © 2014 Velocitech Inc. All information contained herein remains the property of Velocitech Inc.
The Temple of VTEC is not affiliated with American Honda Motor Co., Inc. TOV Policies and Guidelines - Credits - Privacy Policy