[BAZINGA]

I just read that the EPA increased the electric range of the Pacificia to 33 miles up from 30.

For folks clamoring for a large family friendly vehicle this is good news.

 

[Crimson Volt]

33 miles? Wish it was more in the 40s.

 

[jsmay311]

EPA didn't really "increase" anything. Chrysler had publicized an anticipated/estimated rating of 30 miles, and then the official rating test exceeded the earlier estimate, which isn't all that unusual. (See 2016 Volt.)

http://leftlanenews.com/chrysler-pacifica-gets-33-mile-epa-range-estimate-93432.html

33 miles? Wish it was more in the 40s.

It's a freakin minivan with the same battery pack capacity as the 2011-2012 Volt, and yet is rated for ONLY 2 fewer miles than the original Volt despite being way bigger, heavier, and less aerodynamic. I'd say that's an amazing accomplishment.

Volt owners more than anyone else should understand that EREV's / PHEV's are all about design tradeoffs. Range, weight, aerodynamics, cost, storage and passenger space, etc. A minivan in particular needs lots of practical storage space.

 

[JeremyK]

This is a great package at a competitive price. I just wish it was being offered by ANY company other than Chrysler. Their quality is the worst in the industry.

 

[ampera_jed]

..or it just means GM were very conservative with their initial estimates of Volt EV range, which we know to be true.

Is the EPA based on an actual 'measured' value, or is it based on a declaration by the manufacturer and subsequent confirmation by test and measurement? (Like most other homologation testing.)

 

[Breezy]

And about the same price as the Gen 1 Volt.

Reliability is probably not going to be great, but better than a Model X. Regen should at least take care of the rapid brake wear most minivans experience. Oil changes should be infrequent. So, perhaps the number of service trips will be lower even if number of defects is somewhat higher than competitors.

 

[jsmay311]

..or it just means GM were very conservative with their initial estimates of Volt EV range, which we know to be true.

I am very skeptical of the notion that GM or any car manufacturer would purposefully under-report their vehicles' performance on a standardized, government mandated test. Businesses generally wouldn't tell potential customers that their products are worse than they actually are in reality

I was similarly skeptical of some people's suggestion that GM made the Gen 1 purposefully slow off the line so that the tires wouldn't spin. I still have a good laugh when thinking about that.

Is the EPA based on an actual 'measured' value, or is it based on a declaration by the manufacturer and subsequent confirmation by test and measurement? (Like most other homologation testing.)

"Fuel economy is measured under controlled conditions in a laboratory using a series of tests specified by federal law. Manufacturers test their own vehicles—usually pre-production prototypes—and report the results to EPA. EPA reviews the results and confirms about 15%–20% of them through their own tests at the National Vehicles and Fuel Emissions Laboratory."

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml

 

[ampera_jed]

"Fuel economy is measured under controlled conditions in a laboratory using a series of tests specified by federal law. Manufacturers test their own vehicles—usually pre-production prototypes—and report the results to EPA. EPA reviews the results and confirms about 15%–20% of them through their own tests at the National Vehicles and Fuel Emissions Laboratory."

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml

That doesn't really answer the question. Of course the measurement is done in controlled circumstances, but what happens to that measurement?

In the case of the NEDC cycle, for example, the manufacturer makes a declaration of their fuel consumption and if the test gets within 5% of it in the 'controlled circumstances' then the vehicle is awarded the manufacturer's declaration.

The big companies will therefore declare right at the optimistic limit of 5% and then keep sending the car back for retests until happenstance favours the figure they claim. Poorer manufacturers who can't afford to play this game have to declare at the top of the 5% bracket to ensure they only have to pay for the test once.