Honda Sued Over Gas Mileage.

Cotton wrote:

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: I'm actually getting worse in the Jeep than EPA says, apparently. 14mpg city, 19mpg highway, 16mpg combined. Really gets more like 13mpg city, just got 15.1mpg on the last combined tank, and the best i've EVER gotten out of a 100% highway tank was 19.1mpg. Yuck. Starting to think a cold air intake and some exhaust work might be needed to help a little?

My buddy and I both averaged 19 average mixed driving with our 99 XJs. Once I lifted mine it dropped to 14. That's when we stopped uising it as a DD. I keep meaning to get it re-geared, but always find something else to spend the $$ on. Another friend gets similar mileage as you in his XJ and we're trying to figure out what's wrong with it.

That's the thing... it doesn't throw any codes, at all. Seems to have good power, runs like a top, isn't leaking anything.

I can't figure it out. This is the only car i haven't been able to beat EPA mpg ratings with, and i can't even MEET them.

DirtyBird222 wrote: "...this sue happy America is ridiculous and only feeds into the sense of entitlement for people and the laziness of "I don't need to work hard, I'll just let something happen to me and then I'll sue for someone's millions."

Quoted for truth.

jrw1621 wrote: Note that she has a 2006 Civic Hybrid. The EPA testing standards were changed for the 2008 model year. A 2006 Civic Hybrid was rated at 49/50/51 For 2008 that changed to 40/42/45 2006 Prius: 60/55/51 2008 Prius: 48/46/45 Changes in testing.

Testing didn't change, but how the hybrid works probably did, compared to making an approrpiate emissions standard.

But read the complaint again- she's complaining that as the car ages, the economy is dropping off more than expected, down to the 30's, and the car isn't saying that anything is wrong. Even if presented with a 48/46 car that dropped to 30mpg, and didn't flag an error in the car, a complaint is reasonable.

Now who's going to question whether she is flogging the hell out of the car or hypermiling? How many times do you see Prius owners screaming down the highway & launching the thing at every light?

DirtyBird222 wrote: And this people is what is wrong with America today. I'm sorry but I can't back this because someone actually believed the MPG ratings, plus aren't those MPG ratings done by the EPA or some other organization and not the manufacturer? Still, this sue happy America is ridiculous and only feeds into the sense of entitlement for people and the laziness of "I don't need to work hard, I'll just let something happen to me and then I'll sue for someone's millions."

So I can sell a product that isn't capable of what I say it will do and you should take it as a helpless consumer? Seriously?

Spend over $20,000 on something isn't working hard to get it? And when you spend it, you should have no expectations of it being capable of meeting it's advertised goals?

(as posted before, the ratings are likely done by the manufacturer following a procedure that everybody has to meet. As a way to compare vehicles. If Honda uses that as advertising to sell the car, they should be liable to meet what they advertise it to be)

jrw1621 wrote: I would think her claim is not against Honda but rather against The EPA. I believe that Honda does not provide the number to The EPA, rather, The EPA provides the number to Honda. I could be wrong.

^ this.

Honda builds the car. EPA puts the MPG numbers on the sticker. Honda has zero liability for her MPG.

... but she'll probably win anyway.

curtis73 wrote:

jrw1621 wrote: I would think her claim is not against Honda but rather against The EPA. I believe that Honda does not provide the number to The EPA, rather, The EPA provides the number to Honda. I could be wrong.

^ this. Honda builds the car. EPA puts the MPG numbers on the sticker. Honda has zero liability for her MPG. ... but she'll probably win anyway.

Honda advertises the numbers that they generate for the EPA. Advertising a feature means that it can meet a specific performance, which then gives Honda liabilty.

bravenrace wrote:

DirtyBird222 wrote: "...this sue happy America is ridiculous and only feeds into the sense of entitlement for people and the laziness of "I don't need to work hard, I'll just let something happen to me and then I'll sue for someone's millions."

Quoted for truth.

MA$$hole wrote: Now who's going to question whether she is flogging the hell out of the car or hypermiling? How many times do you see Prius owners screaming down the highway & launching the thing at every light?

Amen and Amen!

This is a classic definition of a frivilous lawsuit. What a complete waste. To my knowledge, the EPA mileage ratings aren't gaurantees, they're estimates.

Second, she's going to have to prove that she didn't contribute to the poor mileage through her driving style.

Maybe I should sue Volvo because in my eyes, it doesn't meet the definition of "entry level luxury" car....

In reply to Klayfish:

If GM advertised that their Vette would do the 1/4 mile in 12.5 seconds, and over time that lengthens to over 15 seconds, losing a lot of power, and not indiciating that there was loss of performance, would you have no reason to demand some kind of compensation? Especially if GM advertised the car as being fast?

If Honda doesn't advertised the EPA numbers as some kind of performance measure, then maybe. But if you advertise a measure of performance, and the product can't meet that- then it's up to you to explain why.

MA$$hole wrote: How many times do you see Prius owners ... launching the thing at every light?

Ummm.....How can you tell?

alfadriver wrote: In reply to Klayfish: If GM advertised that their Vette would do the 1/4 mile in 12.5 seconds, and over time that lengthens to over 15 seconds, losing a lot of power, and not indiciating that there was loss of performance, would you have no reason to demand some kind of compensation? Especially if GM advertised the car as being fast? If Honda doesn't advertised the EPA numbers as some kind of performance measure, then maybe. But if you advertise a measure of performance, and the product can't meet that- then it's up to you to explain why.

Your example could get into the realm of mechanical issues, wear/tear, abuse, etc...

Actually, wasn't there a case not too many years ago regarding advertised horsepower numbers? I forget which car it was, I think it may have been Mazda? Didn't the company offer to buy the cars back for any customer who was unhappy with the actual horsepower?

Anyway, for this Honda, I still don't see it. Even if you use the numbers in your advertising, if they're listed as "estimates", I don't think there's liability. Most commercials I see say "The Toyota Corolla gets an estimated 34mpg highway".

Where's Joe Isuzu? He'd gaurantee the car could also do 160mph... those were classic ads.

In reply to Klayfish:

I can see if it's 1 or 2 mpg's, but it's 20. And it's one of the gullible greeniemobile on top of that.

As far as HP numbers, the 99 Mustang Cobra had a recall over the fact it didn't come close to the HP numbers it was supposed to make.

I've gotten upwards of 30 MPG in my '11 Mustang 5.0. (My average highway MPG is 27.) The EPA rating for my particular model is 26. HOWEVER, the small print of the window sticker (yes, I still have the window sticker), says users can expect between 20 and 30 MPG on the highway.

So, the EPA ratings are actually a range, but the median (or mean) is what's actually posted.

Klayfish wrote:

alfadriver wrote: In reply to Klayfish: If GM advertised that their Vette would do the 1/4 mile in 12.5 seconds, and over time that lengthens to over 15 seconds, losing a lot of power, and not indiciating that there was loss of performance, would you have no reason to demand some kind of compensation? Especially if GM advertised the car as being fast? If Honda doesn't advertised the EPA numbers as some kind of performance measure, then maybe. But if you advertise a measure of performance, and the product can't meet that- then it's up to you to explain why.

Your example could get into the realm of mechanical issues, wear/tear, abuse, etc... Actually, wasn't there a case not too many years ago regarding advertised horsepower numbers? I forget which car it was, I think it may have been Mazda? Didn't the company offer to buy the cars back for any customer who was unhappy with the actual horsepower? Anyway, for this Honda, I still don't see it. Even if you use the numbers in your advertising, if they're listed as "estimates", I don't think there's liability. Most commercials I see say "The Toyota Corolla gets an estimated 34mpg highway". Where's Joe Isuzu? He'd gaurantee the car could also do 160mph... those were classic ads.

Not to mention he could catch bullets.

Mazda had a recall for the original RX8 over HP numbers. Ford did also over the Cobra's output. IIRC Mazda offered to 1) buy back the car or 2) you kept the car and they supplied free maintenance and a cash settlement. Ford had the same thing with the Cobra Mustangs but (again IIRC) they reflashed the PCM to provide the rated HP, no buyback involved.

Gas mileage varies due to so many factors that there is just no 'one size fits all' number or solution. The biggest variable is the pilot, he or she has the biggest role. Fuel formulation is way up there too.

In reply to Curmudgeon:

The Cobras also had the upper and lower intake replaced with an Extrude-Honed piece.

I'm with Alfa on this one.

40% reduction in actual efficiency without any indicated malfunction is not an estimate, it's a failure.

The liability for false advertising lies with Honda.

Consider it this way... Let's say a hypermiler claims to have gotten 110 mpg. If the manufacturer uses that claim (with no regard for the testing procedure, accuracy, etc) to increase sales and represents it in a manner that the average customer could reasonably expect similar results, they are misrepresenting the product.

EPA estimates are presented in a manner by manufacturers as a reasonable representation (+- a reasonable margin of error) of what customers should expect. 40% is not a reasonable margin of error.

Klayfish wrote:

alfadriver wrote: In reply to Klayfish: If GM advertised that their Vette would do the 1/4 mile in 12.5 seconds, and over time that lengthens to over 15 seconds, losing a lot of power, and not indiciating that there was loss of performance, would you have no reason to demand some kind of compensation? Especially if GM advertised the car as being fast? If Honda doesn't advertised the EPA numbers as some kind of performance measure, then maybe. But if you advertise a measure of performance, and the product can't meet that- then it's up to you to explain why.

Your example could get into the realm of mechanical issues, wear/tear, abuse, etc... Actually, wasn't there a case not too many years ago regarding advertised horsepower numbers? I forget which car it was, I think it may have been Mazda? Didn't the company offer to buy the cars back for any customer who was unhappy with the actual horsepower? Anyway, for this Honda, I still don't see it. Even if you use the numbers in your advertising, if they're listed as "estimates", I don't think there's liability. Most commercials I see say "The Toyota Corolla gets an estimated 34mpg highway". Where's Joe Isuzu? He'd gaurantee the car could also do 160mph... those were classic ads.

It was Hyundai. My 140hp Elantra was actually only 138hp. Oh the Huge manatee.

Mazda had it as well with the early NB Miatas.

Curmudgeon wrote: Not to mention he could catch bullets.

Separated at birth?

How would one go about proving that their car's fuel mileage is grossly overestimated?

Would you have to provide datalogging, showing that you weren't driving like a jackass? Do you have to prove that you were following the company's recommended maintenance schedules?

Seems like it would be pretty easy for Honda to poke holes in her argument.

But this is a ridiculous lawsuit, hope the court nails her for wasting their time.

Klayfish wrote: ...Most commercials I see say "The Toyota Corolla gets an estimated 34mpg highway". Where's Joe Isuzu? He'd gaurantee the car could also do 160mph... those were classic ads.

most of the commercials i see now tout the EPA number as a feature, like "The new focus comes with three cupolders, and 40mpg!"

DILYSI Dave wrote:

Curmudgeon wrote: Not to mention he could catch bullets.

Separated at birth?

So would he be Joe Pobst or Randy Isuzu?

Not quite as simple as "and 40mpg" but rather...
"...delivers up to 40 mpg" and then an astrix which reads...
2 MPG - EPA estimated fuel economy base engine / transmission. Note: 2012 Focus SE Sedan with SFE Package: EPA-Estimated 28 city/40 hwy/33 combined mpg.
http://www.ford.com/cars/focus/

You are all missing the incredible point of all of this:

1. There were FIVE class action lawsuits that were settled against Honda. The lawyers in these cases stand to make 8.5 million dollars. Each plaintiff stands to get $100-200 from the settlement.
2. The individual in the article above rejected the settlement from Honda because WTF? $100? No, she wants to get paid, just like the legal crew.
3. She took them to Small Claims Court, where NO LAWYERS ARE ALLOWED and asked for the maximum damages on a case that was already decided in the favor of the plaintiffs.
4. She stands to ride that legal precedent to a 10x multiplier on the damages that the people who accept the class action suit are getting.

linky: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2012/01/honda-heads-to-small-claims-court-over-hybrid-gas-mileage/1

In reply to Brett_Murphy:
Yes, that is a bit different and maybe this is not about the merits of mpg but the merits of how to sue.
Checking here: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/small-claims-court-in-your-state-31016.html
I see that in my state of Ohio the most small claims will award is $3k and the parties can have attorneys so much of this may be less relevant here.