GM's Flawed Fuel Economy Numbers Could Affect Millions of Vehicles

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

The strange case of General Motors’ incorrect fuel economy numbers is getting stranger, if it wasn’t odd enough already.

GM announced late last week that it would reprint EPA labels for its 2016 full-size crossovers after the wrong mileage made its way onto window stickers, but Consumer Reports now says there’s something fishy about that.

The official word was that undisclosed changes made to the 2016 GMC Acadia, Chevrolet Traverse and Buick Enclave required the printing of new mileage figures, which, due to a faulty “data transmission,” overstated mileage by one to two miles per gallon.

The vehicles’ powertrain hadn’t changed between this year and last, leaving many to wonder what changes could have been made that would actually lower fuel economy on a newer vehicle.

As Consumer Reports points out, the revised mileage for the 2016 models is lower than that of previous model years. In the case of an all-wheel-drive Acadia, a corrected EPA label for the 2016 model shows a 2 mpg (combined) drop from 2015.

It also means the older range of vehicles beats new models for fuel economy going all the way back to 2007.

Oddly (or ominously, however you want to look at it), when the publication compared the EPA figures for past models with its own observed fuel economy results, the combined mileage from their tests was 2 to 3 mpg lower than the EPA’s. That places the real-world mileage of the older GM triplets closer to the revised 2016 mileage than what was printed on their window sticker.

When contacted, a GM spokesperson told them that “no other models or model years were affected” by the mileage discrepancies.

The EPA asked GM for all data related to the 2016 mileage discrepancy, but it’s unknown if they requested any data dating to previous model years. Either way, the EPA didn’t respond before the report was published.

About two million of the General’s full-size crossovers left dealer lots since they went on the market. If past fuel economy numbers turn out to be inaccurate, it could mean a hefty amount of gasoline expense compensation for GM, a la the Hyundai/Kia controversy of four years ago.

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
7 of 41 comments
  • Ponchoman49 Ponchoman49 on May 18, 2016

    Funny but I don't remember all this fuss being made from CR when the 2008 Prius dropped from a claimed 61 MPG city down to a more realistic 48 from previous years when manufacturers had to adjust ratings for stricter more realistic conditions. Most vehicles lost between 1-3 MPG in the changeover but the Prius dropped by a massive 13 for the city rating and 7 on the highway. Now it's a huge deal that a sticker was mis-printed that was off by 1-2 MPG. 22 highway MPG on the Lambda's was always the rating all along on the Buick Enclave with AWD. 23 was the rating on the Traverse and Acadia also with AWD due to less weight and typically smaller tire sizes. It sounds to me like GM is trying to cover there rear ends by just rating all 3 at the new 15/22 figure in AWD trim which makes sense considering that the latest models have more and more equipment being ordered on them and larger 19 and 20" tire sizes are more frequently being ordered which is proven to reduce MPG some.

    • See 4 previous
    • KixStart KixStart on May 18, 2016

      There was no point singling out the Prius, since the test was optimistic for all cars... if unusually friendly to the Prius. I've owned several Toyotas, including a Prius. On trips, every one of my Toyotas routinely beats its highway number. Other makes I've rented do not do so well. If there's a pattern of deceit at Toyota, I don't see any evidence of it.

  • Lack Thereof Lack Thereof on May 18, 2016

    "The vehicles’ powertrain hadn’t changed between this year and last, leaving many to wonder what changes could have been made that would actually lower fuel economy on a newer vehicle." Well, I dunno, the obvious answer would seem to be reprogrammed shift points, holding gears a few hundred RPM longer and downshifting quicker. With the competition all outclassing them in HP, they have to do something to compete. That seems like something easy to check & verify, because I really don't see any other possibility.

  • MaintenanceCosts I wish more vehicles in our market would be at or under 70" wide. Narrowness makes everything easier in the city.
  • El scotto They should be supping with a very, very long spoon.
  • El scotto [list=1][*]Please make an EV that's not butt-ugly. Not Jaguar gorgeous but Buick handsome will do.[/*][*] For all the golf cart dudes: A Tesla S in Plaid mode will be the fastest ride you'll ever take.[/*][*]We have actual EV owners posting on here. Just calmly stated facts and real world experience. This always seems to bring out those who would argue math.[/*][/list=1]For some people an EV will never do, too far out in the country, taking trips where an EV will need recharged, etc. If you own a home and can charge overnight an EV makes perfect sense. You're refueling while you're sleeping.My condo association is allowing owners to install chargers. You have to pay all of the owners of the parking spaces the new electric service will cross. Suggested fee is 100$ and the one getting a charger pays all the legal and filing fees. I held out for a bottle of 30 year old single malt.Perhaps high end apartments will feature reserved parking spaces with chargers in the future. Until then non home owners are relying on public charge and one of my neighbors is in IT and he charges at work. It's call a perk.I don't see company owned delivery vehicles that are EV's. The USPS and the smiley boxes should be the 1st to do this. Nor are any of our mega car dealerships doing this and but of course advertising this fact.I think a great many of the EV haters haven't came to the self-actualization that no one really cares what you drive. I can respect and appreciate what you drive but if I was pushed to answer, no I really don't care what you drive. Before everyone goes into umbrage over my last sentence, I still like cars. Especially yours.I have heated tiles in my bathroom and my kitchen. The two places you're most likely to be barefoot. An EV may fall into to the one less thing to mess with for many people.Macallan for those who were wondering.
  • EBFlex The way things look in the next 5-10 years no. There are no breakthroughs in battery technology coming, the charging infrastructure is essentially nonexistent, and the price of entry is still way too high.As soon as an EV can meet the bar set by ICE in range, refueling times, and price it will take off.
  • Jalop1991 Way to bury the lead. "Toyota to offer two EVs in the states"!
Next