Mandatory Fuel Economy Labeling Scheme

[Eyke]

What? Now only they report in the news? My dept been giving it out since last year.

 

earlier was voluntary, now is mandatory.

 

[Perrier]

Aiya. There will always be disclaimer thingy on the figures lar so LPPL right?

 

Even some of those 5-star NCAP rating cars, they doesn't come with the spec as per the testing.

 

So even if the buyer don't attain the stated FC, they cannot do anything to the car seller.

[Tkseah]

Looks like the figures are here...

 

http://els.nea.gov.sg/mfels/vehicle.asp

[Mits_jc]

All this for show only...

[Schneider79]

They eat full nothing to do and think of s--t ideas.

Everybody knows the petrol for 100km/l by manufacturer is for reference only and it solely lies on your right foot.

Some Camry owners drives like a mad man and has a petrol consumption that is equivalent to a Porsche, then whats next?

Change the label from 100km/ 11 to a 100km/15l label ? Jiak pa eng si bo ?

[Thejoy]

I am quite puzzled when I saw most of the negative remarks to the labelling scheme.

 

When you complained vehemently on expensive road tax, rising insurance premiums and ERPs, you forgot that petrol alone is easily 20-40% of car ownership and how friendly our petrol competition is. How can fuel economy not be a consideration when comes to car purchase, a long term ownership?

 

We have to look at the bigger picture. We only have to look at the US auto giants to realise something went awfully wrong and took their mgt a damn long time to give up horsepower for efficiency, something which the Japs had long focus on.

 

The japanese govt are one of the first that came up with such labelling schemes that "force" their own japanese companies to comply with the stringent emission & efficiency standards. and see how they manage to compete and outgun the american brands.

 

It is such compulsory labelling schemes that force companies to re-think their designs, which benefit the consumers and environment in the long run.

 

Also, for those that casually write off this labelling scheme, apparently you are not aware of the severity and expensive consequences of global warming and the related environmental issues.

[Kangadrool]

This information is already available in the most AD's brochures. What is missing is the Urban FC figure which most tried to hide. The combined cycle always seem to look very rosy, which is also unlikely to be achieved by drivers here. What they need to mandate also is to include the Urban FC. If you scrutinise closely, most Urban FC figure is closely matched to what you will most likely be getting in SG, and there can be a very stark difference between 2 different makes/models with the same FC for combined cycle. Even for those who travel mostly on our pseudo-highways, sorry to say this is still considered as Urban with sudden slowdowns and bottlenecks at exits/entrances every few kms apart.

 

And as someone already pointed out, why not make the figure be km/l rather than L/100km??????????? which is much clearer.

 

 

[Friendstar]

Looks like the figures are here...

 

http://els.nea.gov.sg/mfels/vehicle.asp

 

 

first word i see is wrong aready

 

"internal combustion" is spelt as "internation combustion"

 

well done...

[Friendstar]

This information is already available in the most AD's brochures. What is missing is the Urban FC figure which most tried to hide. The combined cycle always seem to look very rosy, which is also unlikely to be achieved by drivers here. What they need to mandate also is to include the Urban FC. If you scrutinise closely, most Urban FC figure is closely matched to what you will most likely be getting in SG, and there can be a very stark difference between 2 different makes/models with the same FC for combined cycle. Even for those who travel mostly on our pseudo-highways, sorry to say this is still considered as Urban with sudden slowdowns and bottlenecks at exits/entrances every few kms apart.

 

And as someone already pointed out, why not make the figure be km/l rather than L/100km??????????? which is much clearer.

 

 

go look at the website again.

 

toyota camry's FC is AMAZINGLY BAD

 

even worse than fortuner.

 

wanna know why? the figure was given by PI.

 

All borneo's figures are very very rosy.

[Harveynorman]

Does the RPM reflects the vehicle's FC?? like e.g car A can maintain 100km/h at 1900rpm while car B can maintain 100km/h at 2800rpm

[Bigg]

if want to save the world, make cng cheaper lah knn. stupid gahmen

[Leeweekiong]

next time will have mandatory crash ratings also, haha..

[Octopus]

Does the RPM reflects the vehicle's FC?? like e.g car A can maintain 100km/h at 1900rpm while car B can maintain 100km/h at 2800rpm

 

Difficult to compare in real life. Cos usually smaller cc cars will go higher rpm. So car A could be a 2.4l engine and car B a 1l engine, so which is more fuel efficient?

[Furrynadz]

base on camry 2L

 

i getting 10km/l if 75% city driving, 50% city can hit 12km/l, 100% highway i can hit 15-16

 

[Shull]

I am quite puzzled when I saw most of the negative remarks to the labelling scheme.

 

When you complained vehemently on expensive road tax, rising insurance premiums and ERPs, you forgot that petrol alone is easily 20-40% of car ownership and how friendly our petrol competition is. How can fuel economy not be a consideration when comes to car purchase, a long term ownership?

 

We have to look at the bigger picture. We only have to look at the US auto giants to realise something went awfully wrong and took their mgt a damn long time to give up horsepower for efficiency, something which the Japs had long focus on.

 

The japanese govt are one of the first that came up with such labelling schemes that "force" their own japanese companies to comply with the stringent emission & efficiency standards. and see how they manage to compete and outgun the american brands.

 

It is such compulsory labelling schemes that force companies to re-think their designs, which benefit the consumers and environment in the long run.

 

Also, for those that casually write off this labelling scheme, apparently you are not aware of the severity and expensive consequences of global warming and the related environmental issues.

 

why negative remarks ah?

 

because to put it simply, this is a half farked method..

 

as i stated before, if the govt is really serious about going green..they should change the road tax system to those based on CO2 emission(rather than capacity), lower tax for hybrid/green vehicles and encourage more CNG cars..

[Ekardo]

gahment mah...nothing better to do...

 

how come Fit not in the list ??

[COE_Shark]

another half farked scheme by LTA to 'be environmental friendly'???

 

 

if they're really serious about being environmental friendly, then:

 

1) Stop charging sky high road tax for privately registered diesel vehicles..Newer diesel engine is cleaner(and more efficient) than petrol

 

2) Give more tax breaks for hybrid/CNG cars

 

3) Improve public transport efficiency...so that more people will want to take bus/MRT..

 

I hear you bruther! I've been writing to LTA for years about the diesel issue... since more than 50% of new cars in western europe have diesel engines. Always come back with stupid reply that diesel very polluting etc. Then SMRT come out and advertise - we have Euro IV busses! very good for environment!!! KNN. With the good low-end torque from diesel, it's even more suitable for Singapore stop-go traffic.... and the really funny thing is - Mercedes got its reputation for reliability by having really durable diesel engines last time... but they end up selling only petrol cars in Singapore.

[Kelpie]

I have the same concern with u with regards to tis...i'm suspecting they juz extract the figures direct from the brochures.

 

Unless all the cars with labels are tested locally under the same condition & route, the figures will mean nothing.

 

 

Apart from Japan, Taiwan is one of those countries where they have an appoint authority to do localize testing. The figure is somewhat amusing with Civic clocking an average of 18. This whole labeling thing is a waste of time and resource, IMHO. If a car owner is so concern about global warming, he/she would have looked at the specifications and the features sheet to determine whether their choice car is indeed fuel economical. Better still, don't drive.

 

Regards,