The press release read, "As provided in its June 10, 2009 Operating Agreement, Chrysler Group issued a letter to the U.S. Department of the Treasury stating that the Company has irrevocably committed to begin assembly of a vehicle with an unadjusted combined fuel economy of at least 40 mpg in commercial quantities in a production facility located in the United States."
And,
"In late December, Chrysler Group achieved the Fuel Economy Test, for an unadjusted combined rating of 40 mpg, with a pre-production version of the Dodge Dart, its new, state-of-the-art, four-door sedan."
So does this mean that you'll see a big, fat '40' on the window sticker of the 2012 Dodge Dart? Uh, no.
The number you see there is "unadjusted combined fuel economy" refers not to the window sticker fuel economy estimate, but rather the dreaded CAFE. Corporate Average Fuel Economy is calculated using a pair of dyno-based tests that are widely considered to be bad representations of real-world MPG. Whereas the window sticker tests have been changed and findings downgraded to match real-world results, CAFE has stuck to the original plan since 74.
The next phase in CAFE standards is a 49.6 mpg (See 49.6 vs 54.5 discussion here) figure for cars and light duty trucks by 2025.
So what will the 2013 Dodge Dart get for a combined number? According to our in house CAFE expert, 30. 26 city and 34 highway being the most likely breakdown, but 22/39 isn't out of the question.
someguyposting says:
01:16 PM, 01/ 5/12
If I buy one, can I pay Chrysler in unadjusted dollars?
bodyblue says:
01:19 PM, 01/ 5/12
I am so glad they brought back the Dart name.....lets hope the new one is as rock solid as the old ones were.
brankobox says:
02:16 PM, 01/ 5/12
26 city, 34 highway? Slightly better than "aerodynamic" Dodge Caliber with 2.0 and 5 speed? Sounds like you have one lousy expert.
Fiat 500 1.4 29 city, 45 highway - EU cycle
Fiat 500 1.4 30 city, 38 highway - EPA cycle
Alfa Giulietta 1.4T DSG 35 city, 55 highway - EU cycle
Dodge Dart 1.4T DSG 26 city, 34 highway - EPA cycle IL expert prediction.
IMO better prediction would be 30/40 EPA with dual clutch. Or 31/43 with 9 speed auto.
singer426 says:
02:26 PM, 01/ 5/12
Well, would be nice to see some progress. My 2003 Neon 5-sp Manual, using the new ratings, is 25 city/32 highway. Fast forward 10 years, with HUGE leaps in technology, and you're getting me 1-2 more MPG? This company won't make it unless we see some REAL improvements.
wikiwiki says:
02:51 PM, 01/ 5/12
At least they have the chrome down. Will it also weigh 4000 pounds and have windows the size of portholes? If it's a dud they can at least go back tho their MO and throw in a Hemi and call it something jazzy like Dart R/T Stinger Edition Supee Dupee.
wikiwiki says:
02:52 PM, 01/ 5/12
At least they have the chrome down. Will it also weigh 4000 pounds and have windows the size of portholes? If it's a dud they can at least go back tho their MO and throw in a Hemi and call it something jazzy like Dart R/T Stinger Edition Supee Dupee.
jchan2 says:
03:12 PM, 01/ 5/12
I'll throw a wild guess out there that the window sticker numbers will be much higher than 26/34/30. If they are those numbers, Chrysler is going to get man-handled in the market.
I'll guess 30/40, maybe a little higher on the city.
ilovecars12 says:
04:22 PM, 01/ 5/12
I am very interested to see this car in person in 2 weeks, and see what it can do on a test drive. Chrysler has a ton of momentum right now, and this car needs to be better than at least half of the hyper-competive compacts in the class.
Oh yea, and wikiwiki, consumer reports website is really missing your posts, so you should spend more time there. This is a website for enthusiasts who do not view their car like a refrigerator.
bradyholt says:
04:37 PM, 01/ 5/12
A 30 mpg overall rating requires a pretty high city rating if the highway rating is low, as the 26/34 guess would put it. The city cycle uses more of the gas and therefore has the greater impact on overall mileage, so it wouldn't likely be smack dab between the two.
For comparison, the 27/34 Nissan Sentra is 30 mpg. The 25/36 Cruze is 29 mpg.
bodyblue says:
05:38 PM, 01/ 5/12
"Will it also weigh 4000 pounds and have windows the size of portholes? "
You really need a new rap....cant you think of a better insult? Its the same one you use every time you comment about an American car. Or is it easier just to stereotype? Or are you just bitter that Dodge sells more cars than Infiniti?
blackdynamite1 says:
08:35 PM, 01/ 5/12
Whoever put that 40MPG combined in these press releases we've been seeing all day should pick up their final check next week......
BD
lostboyz says:
03:39 AM, 01/ 6/12
I wouldn't put it past IL to bash chrysler when they get a chance. You people look like fools.
The headline was "Fiat takes remaining 5% ownership of Chrysler by offering a car with a unadjusted combined fuel economy of 40mpg"
That was the deal. They did it. Nice of you to spin as if they are lying about something.
Meanwhile you don't mention the class-action against honda for poor mileage, hyundai causing every car that claims 40hwy or higher to be audited because no one can hit it, etc.
Mike, I know you aren't a journalist, but maybe you should just try and be one for a bit.
motorstreet says:
03:44 AM, 01/ 6/12
I looked up the CAFE rating for my VW Golf TDI. The "bad representation of real world MPG" was much closer to my real world fuel economy than the EPA rating. CAFE rates the manual Golf TDI at 38 mpg city, 58mpg highway, and 45 mpg combined. I get around 35 mpg in the city, 54-59mpg on the highway, and I usually average 43-46mpg. The EPA rates it at 30 mpg city, 41 mpg highway, and 34 mpg combined.
bodyblue says:
08:08 AM, 01/ 6/12
lost +1000
In the past few weeks I have noticed a large amount of bias in ILs reporting and LT blog. I am not sure if it is just a passing thing or a deliberate move to trash American and Asian cars and make VWs look better. Either way its not professional.
jscion says:
08:28 AM, 01/ 6/12
The 40 MPG craze is such hype and is not easily achievable in normal everyday driving. The so called "huge" leaps in technology have only enabled the use of smaller displacement engines with a significant increase in horsepower. Fuel economy is all relative.
cr_driver says:
09:36 AM, 01/ 6/12
"Meanwhile you don't mention the class-action against honda for poor mileage, hyundai causing every car that claims 40hwy or higher to be audited because no one can hit it, etc."
Got links lostboyz?
stoppre75 says:
09:47 AM, 01/ 6/12
"Fuel economy is all relative."
Because fuel economy depends on weight more than any other single factor. These new tech engines could be detuned for a more eco-friendly cycle if they didn't need to lug around 1000 extra pounds of high strength steel.
lostboyz says:
11:36 AM, 01/ 6/12
honda class action and an attorney that is trying to get more (which is dumb)
http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2012/01/honda-sued-over-fuel-economy-claims.html
Also, just look at honda tech, they haven't changed much still use mostly 4 and 5 speed trannys yet claim improved numbers every refresh, seems fishy.
ilovecars12 says:
06:40 PM, 01/ 6/12
Some really good points. The speculation about the tentative estimate is a combined 30? Not really a "gotcha" article as the tone of the author suggests. What if the combined number is actually 31? Then it is 1 mpg off the real world combined of the "40 mpg" Accent?
In addition, we all know that an automaker's 40 mpg claim is about the highway mpg only of one particular trim with one particular tranny. It is smart marketing to say that a cruze gets 42 mpg, when a lot of peoples 4 cyl 1.8 L, automatic cruze gets a combined 27 mpg. Those are both EPA figures, so it is apples to apples to show how much of this 40 mpg thing is BS for marketing. Along the same lines, I have heard 10 times from automotive press that if the focus did not have it's dual clutch trans for maximizng highway mpg that it would have one car of the year b/c it shifts so terribly.
I hoped dodge did not concentrate on the hype and focused on the car as a whole. There are still plenty of people who will buy a good looking, fun to drive, well priced car if it does not hit the magic marketing number and only gets 39 mpg!
teckel12 says:
06:54 AM, 03/14/12
Dear Mr. “I’ve never been to the US but think I know all about it”.
1) We pay plenty in taxes. Bag prices are built into the price of the merchandise. Most bags are now eco-friendly and decompose quickly. When in Europe at the grocery store, they also used plastic bags.
2) I run over 1,500 miles a year and bike over 4,000. I’m 150 lbs. and have <9% body fat. I ran 7 marathons last year, an Ironman, and did a Grand Canyon in/out in one day. What did you do?
3) There’s an aversion for rails to connect urban centers because people don’t travel in this way in the US. Except for large cities (which have a rail system), more city centers are not where people live and work. In the US in most cities, the population works and lives in the suburbs, not the city center. So, it’s a different environment in the US than in Europe, where people concentrate in the city centers. If there was a rail system connecting city centers in my area I would never use it, because I never travel in that way on my own.
4) Water is not “wasted” when it’s used, it’s recycled at 100%. Also, I don’t run the water when I brush or shave in the US just like I don’t when I’m in Europe. Further, I live along the Great Lakes, the largest source of fresh water in the world. So, availability and cost can obviously be much different than other parts of the world.
5) When I’ve been in Europe, I saw all kinds of trucks on the road spewing out black exhaust. Because our government has lower taxes, our gas prices are less which allows us to have larger and safer vehicles (yes, you have a better chance of living in a car crash with a SUV than a Smart Car). Further, I have a Prius that gets 48mpg and an Elantra that gets 40mpg.
6) There is close to zero wasted food in my house. We cook almost all of our own meals and don’t eat fast food or prepared food. Today for lunch I’m having leftovers from last night’s dinner (very typical). When in Europe, I saw locals at restaurants not finish their meals. I can’t believe anyone wastes 30-40 percent of their food. Also, that seems like a large range, so it’s probably a guess by some biased tree hugger in Europe who’s anti-US like yourself.
I could keep going all day. Cut the BS, you know nothing about the US. You’re jealous and this is how you deal with your inadequacies. Your conclusions use questionable logic. You believe 36mpg vs. 40mpg is an issue only because “they” have very little money? Yet, according to you, "they" waste 30-40% of their food and run water down the drain? Which one is it? Anyway, your jealousy of the US is downright sad, and your stereotypes are way off the mark. Maybe you should actually visit the US before you make conclusions from thousands of miles away. Also, solve your own problems before you blame others for your own self-inflicted misfortune.