Improved Fuel Economy, Increased Engine Performance-At What Cost?

IT’S quite amazing how far the human mind will travel to avoid reality, especially if that reality is stark and unrelenting. Faced with a need to make change, hard decisions or sacrifice, we will almost always procrastinate, or rationalize, or equivocate. If the news is particularly desperate, we’ll seek the sanctuary of any evangelist/shaman/sidewalk fortune-teller willing to convince us, however briefly, that everything will be all right. Indeed, I suspect the old adage that “statistics don’t lie but liars use statistics” is more a reflection of our desperation to believe untruths rather than the deceiver’s desire to perpetrate them. And, Lordy, do statistics lie. My favorites, being the petrol-dipped gear head that I am, are official fuel economy standards, the numbers trumpeted whenever someone wants to a) brag about some supposedly planet-saving technology, or b) convince us that he or she really is doing something about it. Oh, we north of the 49th-ers can take some small solace in the fact that our regulatory books are a little less cooked than those of our American cousins. But the fuel-economy numbers on the window-sticker tags in our showrooms are still built of the same fantasy that promises balanced Greek budgets. Of course, everyone — at least everyone save the dedicated high-miler— realizes that the boasted numbers are pure flights of fancy. But, goes the rationalization, they at least give us a relative basis of comparison. Even if the numbers are 10-per-cent, 20-per-cent or even 30-per-cent optimistic, they’re equally skewed, so we at least know that car A or technology B is more frugal than that other gas hog we’re considering. On a limited basis, that’s probably true. Compare a Toyota Yaris with a Hyundai Accent and, since both feature small gasoline-fuelled engines with manual transmissions, the correlation, if not absolute, is at least valid. Where this convenient yardstick starts falling apart is when you start comparing new technologies to conventional ones using either the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s or Transport Canada’s official figures. After all, the reasoning behind the mass switch to turbo charging (such as with the Ford EcoBoost engine or in BMW M and Mercedes-Benz AMG models) and hybrids is that these higher-tech alternatives are less wasteful than what we currently drive. And, indeed, they are — at least according to official figures. Ford’s EcoBoost V6 F-150, for instance, is touted as getting eight-percent better fuel economy than the V8 it supplants. Making the argument more persuasive is that the theory makes sense as well: Make the engine smaller so it sips fuel under a lighter load, and then turbo charge it so it doesn’t sacrifice performance when we need it. Out on the open road, it’s not quite so simple. Yes, there can be some fuel economies, but only if you never use all that horsepower at hand. Dip into all those turbocharged ponies and the mileage you get is seldom superior to that of the gas-guzzler it’s supposed to supplant. While I always enjoy this new spate of turbocharged engines (they are way powerful), I almost never see an improvement in fuel economy. I’m not alone. Consumer Reports, hardly a bastion of wastrels, recently found that the 3.7-litre EcoBoost V6 in the aforementioned F-150 pickup did not increase real-world fuel economy over the 5.0L V8 it’s supposed to supplant (it does tow better, however, which explains its popularity). The same principle applies — or, more accurately, is applied — to the first few generations of (non-plug-in) hybrids. Essentially, their electrical “boost” works in the same manner: having the electric motor there to supplant the gasoline engine means displacement and fuel consumption can be reduced. The same presuppositions hold, however; you have to dramatically alter your driving habits to capitalize on their potential frugality. One high-miler website, for instance, recommends that you keep the throttle pedal in the exact same position, even when driving up and down steep hills. Yes, it saves precious drops of fuel, but it does turn you into that jerk that we all curse for puttering up hills in the fast lane at 75 miles per hour, and then speeding like a demon down the other side. The issue we’re all trying to avoid is that with improved fuel economy and reduced emissions will come some sacrifice. As much as they force us to face that dreaded reality, it behooves us to understand the fantasies we’re being fed. Environmentalists want us to completely change the way we live. EV proponents expect you to abandon the freedom automobiles have promised for more than a century — namely, to go where you want when you want. Hybrid manufacturers need you to dramatically alter the way you drive if their wares are to be optimized. Those who tout turbo charging as a panacea for profligacy merely want you to suspend reality. And we the consumer? Well, we don’t want to change a damned thing.