The Car Awards Group, Inc. or CAGI, known for its annual Car of the Year – Philippines and Truck of the Year – Philippines awards has come up with what they hope as a standardized way of measuring fuel economy of vehicles in the Philippines. According to CAGI, simply relying on data provided by overseas entities such as the US’s EPA, Europe’s NEDC, or Japan’s JC08 standards cannot accurately capture pertinent data for two reasons: first, because the models sold in the Philippines may vary from what’s sold in the US, Japan, and Europe; second, because it doesn’t capture driving habits here in the Philippines.
Recognizing this, CAGI, under the leadership of Ferman Lao, embarked on making fuel economy measurement much more scientifically-sound. Partnering with SpeedLab, they have devised a methodology quite different from what you’d expect.
Instead of using a rolling road or chassis dynamometer like the US EPA, Europe NEDC, and Japan JC08, CAGI used a closed course test loop the Clark International Speedway which is claimed to simulate typical urban conditions. After coming up with the course, experienced drivers are then given the keys and are to drive around the track with a specific target time in mind (as opposed to driving the fastest lap possible). For CAGI, this creates a fuel consumption profile that’s consistent not just for results for a particular vehicle but more importantly between vehicles. The test is carried out using one single test vehicle over two days where each vehicle logged in around 100 kilometers of testing.
Furthermore, CAGI has eschewed using the familiar (and tried-and-tested) “full tank method” which requires a vehicle to be filled to the brim before the test and then filled to the brim once more after the test to determine the amount of fuel used. CAGI argues that this method, though highly practical for consumers, is time consuming and cumbersome. More importantly, it doesn’t take into consideration the effects of fuel evaporation due to ambient and operating temperatures.
CAGI then turned things around and has come up with a very different method. Again, instead of relying on what other countries have done (normally using an external fuel tank with a predetermined amount of fuel that feeds fuel directly into the engine), they have come up with the idea to measure fuel not by volume (liters) but by weight (kilograms) instead. The testing committee will measure the weight of each vehicle before and after each test and use tables provided by partner Chevron to convert kilograms of fuel into liters, based on ambient temperature.
Do you agree with CAGI’s methodology or do you think they’re just smoking weed on this one? Let us know below. The comments section is all yours. In the meantime, the results of the CAGI fuel efficiency test in the table below.
CAGI Fuel Economy Benchmarking Results
|Make and Model||km/L|
|BYD F5 1.5 A/T||8.4|
|BYD L3 1.5 M/T||9.4|
|Chevrolet Spark 1.0 A/T||7.0|
|Chevrolet Spin 1.3 CRDi M/T||12.2|
|Chevrolet Trailblazer 2.8 CRDi LTZ A/T||6.3|
|Ford Fiesta EcoBoost SportShift||9.3|
|Foton Thunder CRDi 4x2 M/T||5.5|
|Foton Thunder CRDi 4x4 M/T||4.7|
|Foton Tornado CRDi M/T||8.8|
|Foton Traveller CRDi M/T||6.0|
|Kia Rio 1.2 SLX 4DR M/T||10.5|
|Kia Sportage 2.0 LX FWD A/T||8.5|
|Mazda 6 2.5 Skyactiv||7.2|
|Mazda CX-5 2.5 Skyactiv Sport||6.9|
|Mitsubishi Lancer 1.6 GLX M/T||9.8|
|Mitsubishi Mirage GLS CVT||11.1|
|Misubishi Mirage G4 GL M/T||11.1|
|Toyota Vios 1.3 E M/T||10.5|
|Toyota Vios 1.3 E A/T||8.4|