Many conversations concerning the automotive world nowadays often focus on which cars and trucks are the most fuel efficient.
But which ones are the most inefficient?
Thankfully, the EPA keeps track of that sort statistic, which they have used to compile a list for 2021: &ldqu…
Anyone want to start guessing without reading the article first?
My guess? Chrysler/Fiat-whatever the hell its called this week.
I'll guess Bentley / Rolls Royce.
RX Reven' said:I'll guess Bentley / Rolls Royce.
To the buyers spending that sort of money on a car, gas-guzzler taxes and fuel costs aren't even pocket change.
"Most inefficient carmaker" is not the same as "maker of most inefficient cars"
AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:"Most inefficient carmaker" is not the same as "maker of most inefficient cars"
Very true, although in this case they may be both.
AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:"Most inefficient carmaker" is not the same as "maker of most inefficient cars"
Yup. Carmaker efficiency is probably best measured by profit margin %.
In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :
Man hours per vehicle built?
I didn't know there were 16 different models of Rolls-Royce. Of course, No Rolls-Royce Is Identical
The fact that the EPA classifies any Bentley as a compact car is PROOF they don't know wtf they are doing. And, therefore, this report loses all credibility.
So, is compact, sub-compact and mini-compact based on interior volume? What metric is used to classify the cars?
Edit- found it in the FAQ
The EPA size class for cars is based on interior passenger and cargo volumes as described below. The size class for trucks is defined by the gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR), which is the weight of the vehicle and its carrying capacity. Fuel economy regulations do not apply to heavy-duty vehicles, so they are not tested. See Which Vehicles Are Tested for more information on these vehicles.
Passenger & Cargo Volume (Cu. Ft.)
Two-Seaters Any (cars designed to seat only two adults)
Sedans Mini-compact < 85, Sub-compact 85 to 99, Compact 100 to 109, Mid-Size 110 to 119, Large 120 or more
Station Wagons Small < 130, Mid-Size 130 to 159, Large160 or more
Pete. (l33t FS) said:In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :
Man hours per vehicle built?
I mean, you can define efficiency any way you like. Most cups of coffee drunk per hour of union labor if you want. :)
But since "automakers" are generally corporations, I think the most "natural" measure of efficiency is how well they use capital to create new wealth.
I would've never guessed Rolls, mostly because I don't even consider them cars, given I'll never own one, nor have I ever heard anything that would make me desire to own one
Never heard of This. What cars do they make? Some sort of niche tractor pulling company?
Lamborghini has to be up there or at least number one if I had to take a guess. The Urus the most sedate of their cars gets 12mpg in the real world.
It makes zero sense to me that Rolls has no fully electric option by now. Their whole thing is quiet, effortless, smooth travel in enormous vehicles. What does that better than silent, torquey EVs?
STM317 said:It makes zero sense to me that Rolls has no fully electric option by now. Their whole thing is quiet, effortless, smooth travel in enormous vehicles. What does that better than silent, torquey EVs?
Probably will happen as soon as BMW makes a big enough system. As far as I can tell, Tesla is the only one with an appropriate powertrain for a Rolls, and I don't see BMW buying from them.
adam525i said:So, is compact, sub-compact and mini-compact based on interior volume? What metric is used to classify the cars?
Edit- found it in the FAQ
The EPA size class for cars is based on interior passenger and cargo volumes as described below. The size class for trucks is defined by the gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR), which is the weight of the vehicle and its carrying capacity. Fuel economy regulations do not apply to heavy-duty vehicles, so they are not tested. See Which Vehicles Are Tested for more information on these vehicles.
Passenger & Cargo Volume (Cu. Ft.)
Two-Seaters Any (cars designed to seat only two adults)
Sedans Mini-compact < 85, Sub-compact 85 to 99, Compact 100 to 109, Mid-Size 110 to 119, Large 120 or more
Station Wagons Small < 130, Mid-Size 130 to 159, Large160 or more
But that's kind of old separations- the current targets are based on vehicle footprint as opposed to interior volume. So these really large cars have lower targets than other compact cars just because they are so long.
Appleseed said:Anyone want to start guessing without reading the article first?
My guess? Chrysler/Fiat-whatever the hell its called this week.
I had sort of expected to see Dodge on there - and also for them to take out advertisements that they made the list, sort of like the time they ran an ad with the NHRA's letter complaining the Demon did not have the safety gear it needed for its performance.
alfadriver said:STM317 said:It makes zero sense to me that Rolls has no fully electric option by now. Their whole thing is quiet, effortless, smooth travel in enormous vehicles. What does that better than silent, torquey EVs?
Probably will happen as soon as BMW makes a big enough system. As far as I can tell, Tesla is the only one with an appropriate powertrain for a Rolls, and I don't see BMW buying from them.
Right. I'm just surprised it hasn't happened sooner. It seems like BMW will have a reasonably capable EV platform coming to market in the next year sometime that's expected to eventually underpin an electric 7 series, and then perhaps a Rolls.
Same with Bentley and their access to the VW/Audi/Porsche parts bin. I'm sure they're coming, but I'm surprised they weren't the first places that EV powertrains were used. It's 'de rigueur' to roll out the highest, most expensive trim levels of a new EV first. It seems like an EV ultra-luxury vehicle fits that philosophy to a T. EV's seem like a perfect fit for the dynamic goals of these types of vehicles, and the manufacturers can hide the high cost with no problems.
STM317 said:It makes zero sense to me that Rolls has no fully electric option by now. Their whole thing is quiet, effortless, smooth travel in enormous vehicles. What does that better than silent, torquey EVs?
They're also about in your face, I'm rich and you're not, excessive consumerism and burning unnecessarily large amounts of fossil fuel says that about as well as anything.
codrus (Forum Supporter) said:AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:"Most inefficient carmaker" is not the same as "maker of most inefficient cars"
Yup. Carmaker efficiency is probably best measured by profit margin %.
Interesting. I was thinking about manufacturing efficiency, as in wasting time and materials during the build process. No doubt my background in manufacturing had me thinking in those terms.
Recovering cost of capital for a specific project or product is one thing, then there's recovering cost of capital investment for the entire company, then your net profit margin which shows how efficient the marketing and administration of the company is compared to the gross profit margin (which doesn't contain marketing and administration). All are measures of efficiency really.
You'll need to log in to post.
