(March 10, 2015) DETROIT — As auto companies race to meet future federally-mandated CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) targets, more consumers, auto companies and government watchdogs are monitoring miles-per-gallon (mpg) vehicle performance.

The accuracy of fuel-economy numbers mandated by the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been a major issue with auto makers and consumers alike. In recent months, Ford, Mercedes-Benz, Mini Cooper, Hyundai and Kia have all had their reported EPA mileage numbers questioned.

Emissions Analytics (EA), a UK-based company, has worked to resolve the problem by developing test procedures that provide much more accurate "real world" results.

EA points out that any fixed cycle, laboratory-based test conducted by auto makers is open to optimization. EPA estimates, for example, are based on lab tests designed to measure vehicles with conventional powertrains rather than today's increasingly sophisticated gas/electric systems. Today, the UK firm can provide consumers, automotive suppliers and car makers with much more accurate fuel-economy and emissions data.

"We take vehicles out of test labs where they are hooked up to road-test simulators and put them through their paces in city traffic and under other 'real world' road conditions," explains Nick Molden, CEO of EA. "Our overall Real MPG rating is weighted 55 percent city driving and 45 percent highway, the same as EPA ratings, but the big difference is that our test vehicles are driven for 100 miles under real world conditions."

EA's in-depth test results also are being used by automotive enthusiast publications such as Motor Trend in North America and What Car? in the UK.

Over the past year, EA has teamed up with Motor Trend to provide real-world mileage test information referred to as Real MPG, starting with the magazine's 2014 Car of the Year competition and continuing through 2014 to recent judging for its 2015 Truck of the Year contest won by the Chevrolet Colorado. The magazine publishes EPA mpg results, as well as EA's Real MPG results on tested vehicles for readers to make comparisons.

Motor Trend and EA note that auto manufacturers are under internal pressure to improve mpg numbers on an annual basis. The fastest way to achieve outstanding mpg results is to perform better on the EPA test rather than focusing on real world performance.

Other fuel-economy observations based on findings from the Motor Trend-EA test program include:

    • Only a small sampling of cars are spot-checked by the government

    • Some vehicle stickers are showing far higher mpg ratings than many drivers will actually achieve while around 30% are underestimating the miles per gallon, especially diesels. Those that are overestimating their fuel-economy do so by an average of 6.8%.

The Real MPG solution illustrates basic differences with EPA testing such as:

       •  Real MPG results are produced in the real world with actual aerodynamics, true rolling resistance and real traffic acceleration rates. EPA tests are conducted on a laboratory dynamometer with simulated aerodynamics and test drivers who follow a line on a monitor.

        • Real MPG test cars are equipped with a sophisticated and sensitive array of sensors to record mileage over a carefully-considered course that realistically represents both city and highway driving.

In its tests of 2015-model vehicles, EA has found that the 2015 models are falling short of reported EPA MPG sticker numbers by an average of around three percent. EA's Real MPG testing also has found wide individual car-line variations in fuel economy compared with EPA results. For example, some manufacturers' Real MPG test results are nine percent above EPA mpg, while others were nine percent below EPA mileage results.