New real-world fuel study to expose manufacturer claims

Ever second-guessed the amount of fuel your car uses against the manufacturer claim? You’re not alone.

New research has cast serious doubt on the accuracy of fuel use figures and emission ratings issued by car makers in Australia.

According to preliminary results released by the Australian Automobile Association today, new cars are consuming up to 35 per cent more fuel in the real world compared to standardised laboratory tests, or about 20 per cent more on average.

It was also highlighted that one undisclosed vehicle on test returned four times the legal limit for carbon monoxide.

Manufacturers have welcomed the research, and are interested in pouring over more detailed findings. The peak industry body, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries, has warned the research may complicate emission standards.

A perennial problem for car buyers, every new vehicle sold in Australia is now accompanied by a fuel use and emissions rating compiled through lab-based rolling tests. Anecdotally, most are difficult to replicate on the road.

The AAA put that feedback to test, bringing 10 cars together for a series of Australian tests between May and October. Each car, fitted with sensors at the rear, completed urban, rural and highway runs twice, running through cold and hot start procedures to produce results.

The AAA is the peak body for motoring clubs such as the NRMA and RACV. It set aside $500,000 for the research, commissioning Victorian engineering company ABMARC to conduct the tests on a fleet of 30 vehicles. It will deliver a full report in 2017.

According to AAA chief executive Michael Bradley, the manufacturer claims are costing consumers hundreds of extra dollars each year in fuel. The AAA has released the early findings to feed into two government reviews on vehicles emissions.

“These results suggest that as emissions regulations around the world become more stringent, auto manufacturers are producing vehicles that limit emissions in the laboratory, but not necessarily in the real world," Bradley said.

"With the government actively considering stricter standards for Australia's vehicle and fuel sectors, it's critical that real-world testing is introduced to ensure motorists aren't asked to pay more for regulation that fails to deliver environmental benefit."

The new research follows Volkswagen’s diesel emissions scandal last year, in which the German manufacturer admitted to fitting emissions cheating software in certain models. Volkswagen Group Australia recently extended a recall of vehicles affected locally.

Volkswagen Australia corporate communications general manager Paul Pottinger welcomed the new research.

“We look forward very much to seeing these results. The more scrutiny the better,” he said. “There are no specifics at all at the moment.”

Other stakeholders have cautiously welcomed the research, citing Australia’s low quality fuel standards as one potential hurdle.

“Our biggest concern is that the consumer may be confused about which emissions standard to believe: the non-mandated one which cannot be reliably repeated, or the one which is government mandated, conducted in controlled conditions, under very strict protocols, and is replicable time and again across different brands and models,” FCAI chief executive Tony Weber said.

“The government’s mandated emission rating which appears on the windscreen of every new car sold in Australia is reasonably well understood. But it can only serve as a guide to consumers because of the huge number of variables which exist out on the public road.”

Mr Bradley said the benefits of the research were wide-ranging.

“Proponents of stricter regulations say higher vehicle and fuel costs passed on to motorists will over time be offset by fuel savings, but our results undermine such assurances as savings accrued only in a laboratory are of little use to consumers in the real world," he argued.