Scotty57
This is garbage. If the 2013 Santa Fe sport has to be reduced to the "claimed" levels of the 2010-2012 Santa Fes, it means that those were also artificially high, despite those models not showing up on their list. The 2013 weighs less, has improved aerodynamics, and (allegedly) a more efficient motor. How could it possibly get the same mileage as the 2012?
I am going to contact Hyundai to complain since that flys in the face of all logic. I certainly would not complain if whoever is running the class action lawsuit gets it expanded to include more vehicles beyond just the elantra. Also looking at their numbers they are still not doing things correctly. 2012 Tucson 4WD goes from 21/28/23 to 20/27/23. HOW COULD THE COMBINED MILEAGE STAY THE SAME? I could probably go on and on. The 2012 Sorento is very similar to the 2012 Santa Fe, has better aerodynamics, and is rated 18/24 while the Santa Fe carries a 20/26 rating? How could that be possible? Really I blame the EPA. They put an idiotic regulation in place for testing fuel economy then don't bother to actually pay attention or police anything. We would be much better off with getting rid of the EPA and allowing the SAE to set fuel economy tests and allow manufacturers to subscribe to those tests if they want to have the SAE stamp of approval.
I just took a look at the Hyundai web site and the explanatory information that is presented.
The degradation in combined fuel economy for my vehicle, a 2.4L, FWD version, is 7.7%. Prior to retirement, I had a terrific job as a test pilot for a major aircraft manufacturer ( 39 years ). Performance testing mistakes of 7.7% doesn't happen*, and I would suggest that measuring performance on flying aircraft is a bit more difficult that on ground vehicles.
So, the reading on the web site is interesting background material, but in reality a feeble attempt to cover up a multi-model, multi-year, fraud.
* That includes both the aircraft's performance and the installed engine (s ) performance, taken both individually and as a complete flight vehicle.
The degradation in combined fuel economy for my vehicle, a 2.4L, FWD version, is 7.7%. Prior to retirement, I had a terrific job as a test pilot for a major aircraft manufacturer ( 39 years ). Performance testing mistakes of 7.7% doesn't happen*, and I would suggest that measuring performance on flying aircraft is a bit more difficult that on ground vehicles.
So, the reading on the web site is interesting background material, but in reality a feeble attempt to cover up a multi-model, multi-year, fraud.
* That includes both the aircraft's performance and the installed engine (s ) performance, taken both individually and as a complete flight vehicle.
Ive had the car for less than a month and filled it up three times.
Tank 1: 16.1 MPG
Tank 2: 17.2 MPG
Tank 3: 16.9 MPG
Tank 4: it's parked rite now but probably evaporating fast. This is tank is current and was particularly hard to get b/c of Sandy.
I can't help but feel defrauded. I bought the Santa Fe knowing that my days of combined 28MPG were over but didn't think I'd be getting Escalade like MPGs. I've gone from a happy new hyundai customer to completely disappointed.
Tank 1: 16.1 MPG
Tank 2: 17.2 MPG
Tank 3: 16.9 MPG
Tank 4: it's parked rite now but probably evaporating fast. This is tank is current and was particularly hard to get b/c of Sandy.
I can't help but feel defrauded. I bought the Santa Fe knowing that my days of combined 28MPG were over but didn't think I'd be getting Escalade like MPGs. I've gone from a happy new hyundai customer to completely disappointed.
David, you obviously haven't looked at the other forums then. Hardly anyone gets the advertised mpg on a 4 cyl Equinox. Sounds like you made the right choice to wait before buying a 2013 SF... Doubt you would be happy with one if you went in knowing you were already disappointed. Especially since you are so disappointed in your Sonata.
I just sent an e-mail off to the mpg address stating I would settle for no less than $4725. The debit card program does not satisfy my requirements. I purchased based on fuel savings I would get relative to the MPG stated. Over the 8 year period I would be driving the vehicle resulted in a $3600 fuel savings. Add the additional 1125 for punitive damages as they misrepresented the MPG. Send me a check and the waiver to not participate in any class action law suit. I'll be sure to update the thread if it happens. Not getting my hopes up, but it was a good venting.
carrierpr, I think we all should send e-mails stating the debit card isn't enough. I'd post my entire e-mail but it is quite wordy and I included my dismay at service issues not being addressed to my satisfaction. So I summarized here. But to be honest, we all should e-mail them and state our decisions based on MPG to purchase have been fraudulently represented and they should make compensation commensurate to the 'business decisions made' (IE crime committed). Their MPG ratings were all part of a multi year ploy and advertising campaign in order to boost sales across their entire product line. It backfired.
So the estimator tool is now up, but when I out my VIN in and click next, nothing happens. Has anyone been able to use the estimator?
(US: https://hyundaimpginfo.com/ )
(US: https://hyundaimpginfo.com/ )
You know the ironic part to this thing for me is that its all about a REIMBURSEMENT FOR GAS, and Hyundai wants to send a DEBIT CARD. For which most GAS stations will charge a higher price per gallon as opposed to cash. SCREWED AGAIN!! Why not just send me a check that I can cash? Talk about adding insult to injury! SMH
A good article about how Hyundai/Kia is still dragging their feet on FULLY admitting/announcing it to prospective buyers and current owners.
Drive On: Hyundai, Kia bury bad news on mpg reductions
Also notice the comparison with Toyota and the way they handled their recalls.
Drive On: Hyundai, Kia bury bad news on mpg reductions
Also notice the comparison with Toyota and the way they handled their recalls.
Also i noticed that for financing the 2013 santa fe its 2.95% interest.. which is lower, but not much, for a 84 month term from 2.99%. But what i find hilarious is that before the lower the term the lower the interest rate but right now on the site it seems not matter what term you have its always 2.95%.. so looks like they are giving you a discount.. but trying to cover that lose with higher interest rates on lower terms... its pretty ridiculous.
My estimator says I should get $22. The funnier part that my wife pointed out, who works in the banking industry, is if they give you a debit card, there will be fees if you want to turn it into cash, unless you use it directly at the pump I guess.
I'd really like to see the formula they are using to determine how they think this is fair to most owners out there. Based on simple math in the beginning of this thread it's clearly far lower than anticipated.
I'd really like to see the formula they are using to determine how they think this is fair to most owners out there. Based on simple math in the beginning of this thread it's clearly far lower than anticipated.
If it's any help to folks, enter the following mileage into the estimator and it'll tell you the "per 1000" rate you're going to receive.
Starting mileage: 0
Ending Mileage: 1000
Mine was $14.52 per 1000 miles driven. I tried many different numbers, but it always figured out to this rate for me. (I'm assuming Hyundai is using different gas prices based on state of residence.)
$14.52 is about an 8% reimbursement on the gas cost for 1000 miles:
(1000 miles)*($3.50 / gallon) * (1 gallon/21 miles) = $166.66
14.52 / 166.66 = 8.7% refund
Starting mileage: 0
Ending Mileage: 1000
Mine was $14.52 per 1000 miles driven. I tried many different numbers, but it always figured out to this rate for me. (I'm assuming Hyundai is using different gas prices based on state of residence.)
$14.52 is about an 8% reimbursement on the gas cost for 1000 miles:
(1000 miles)*($3.50 / gallon) * (1 gallon/21 miles) = $166.66
14.52 / 166.66 = 8.7% refund
Looks like anyone with the V6 SF is left high and dry. My 2011 stated 35mpg on the HWY. I know the sticker is always out but I would have been happy to get 30mpg. The closest I have came to that is 24mpg with cruise set at 60mph. No where near sticker . I live in Saskatchewan Canada. Pretty flat country. Hills are few and far between. I have had the car checked 3 times already and have 17000 miles or 27350 kms on the car already. It should be broke in. Doesn't matter what grade of gas used, mpg is always averaged at the pump and it is always with in .5 of a gallon.
Three different dealerships all say the same thing. Can't find anything wrong, not throwing any codes.
I bought the SF based on the MPG stated. I have talked to several other people in town with the same complaint about mpg. Seems like Hyundai is only interested the 4 bangers..
I like the car , hate the mpg and I won't buy another one unless something changes in the MPG. There is no reason that these cars and others larger can not get 40mpg, they just don't want to make them that good. Sales would drop off after a year and then they would have to make them more efficient for the next year.
I have a 1994 chevy truck that is better on gas then any of the new stuff with 15+ years of advanced technology and I paid 1/3rd the cost of what they are priced at today. Does that make any sense.
Three different dealerships all say the same thing. Can't find anything wrong, not throwing any codes.
I bought the SF based on the MPG stated. I have talked to several other people in town with the same complaint about mpg. Seems like Hyundai is only interested the 4 bangers..
I like the car , hate the mpg and I won't buy another one unless something changes in the MPG. There is no reason that these cars and others larger can not get 40mpg, they just don't want to make them that good. Sales would drop off after a year and then they would have to make them more efficient for the next year.
I have a 1994 chevy truck that is better on gas then any of the new stuff with 15+ years of advanced technology and I paid 1/3rd the cost of what they are priced at today. Does that make any sense.
Yes keep in mind that here in Canada we base MPG on the imperial gallon where you guys use the US gallon.
Sent from my iPhone using Autoguide.com App
Sent from my iPhone using Autoguide.com App
KenDude,
With regard to #2:
I is my understanding from the info on the website that Hyundai is paying on the combined mpg which is only 2 mpg. This is not acceptable to me because 95% of my driving is highway.
With regard to #4:
The buy back would be the only acceptable outcome for me as I tend to keep my vehicles to well over 300K miles. The 2 mpg reimbursement with a 120 day payment is not acceptable for me. I also do not live in a town that has a dealership so I would therefore have to drive 35 miles one way to get mileage confirmed.
As an aside, I am a very conservative driver. I have always been able to get rated highway mpg from every car I have owned since 1990. I am still not able to get the newly revised 27 mpg highway for the 2.0T.
I am definitely not a happy camper with this situation and feel that this is going to be a much more costly purchase than ever expected. I am not looking to profit from this but only to break even. The question is how long do we wait for Hyundai to say for sure if they will offer anything besides the reimbursement just announced.
With regard to #2:
I is my understanding from the info on the website that Hyundai is paying on the combined mpg which is only 2 mpg. This is not acceptable to me because 95% of my driving is highway.
With regard to #4:
The buy back would be the only acceptable outcome for me as I tend to keep my vehicles to well over 300K miles. The 2 mpg reimbursement with a 120 day payment is not acceptable for me. I also do not live in a town that has a dealership so I would therefore have to drive 35 miles one way to get mileage confirmed.
As an aside, I am a very conservative driver. I have always been able to get rated highway mpg from every car I have owned since 1990. I am still not able to get the newly revised 27 mpg highway for the 2.0T.
I am definitely not a happy camper with this situation and feel that this is going to be a much more costly purchase than ever expected. I am not looking to profit from this but only to break even. The question is how long do we wait for Hyundai to say for sure if they will offer anything besides the reimbursement just announced.
KenDude
#2- My calculated amount of 13.01 was based on 1560 miles less the 196 starting odo meter when I purchased. I feel that amount is a slap in the face and there was no calculating out what future would be. It seems to me they will reload the debit card after a yearly visit to the dealer to verify mileage. Too convenient for them, but a pain for us and the amount they're offering is way too dismal (IE the 2MPG drop). Their plan does not take into account the vastly fluctuating gas prices.
#3- If you check your financing contract (at least on mine) it showed a 'value' amount in the collateral information that contained the make, year, model and VIN. In my case the value stated was 78% of the purchase price (before tax) so a 22% depreciation after driven off the lot (seems typical).
#4- In my e-mail I mentioned that Hyundai has been promoting a multi-year campaign touting the best MPG across multiple models making them 'the most fuel efficient auto maker', among many other issues that I've read on this forum including the Kia mfr plate. To knowingly publish exaggerated MPG across that many vehicles for that long is definitely fraud and not a simple mistake. As another poster put it, to continue that approach and not address the problem at first discovery makes their standards and practices department very suspect.
#5 - I based my settlement amount on my initial calculations of the additional highway miles I was driving now times the difference in MPG from my old vehicle to the new 2013 (which was 10MPG). And then extrapolated that out over the typical 8 year period that I typically keep a vehicle times the average $/gal for 2012 Michigan. Then I added a 15% penalty amount on top of that based on their offering.
We all have been duped. In this day of gas price volatility and if a feather drops on an oil rig in the pacific gas has to go up .20/gal (an exaggeration but it is ridiculous what affects the immediacy of the jumps) MPG is one of the major considerations in purchasing a vehicle. I'd not have purchased the new Santa Fe if it reflected MPG ratings less than the 31 HWY they were touting. I did the math. I calculated out that I would be saving X amount of dollars if purchasing the vehicle. That's what I am expecting in return. That is fair compensation. It is not being suit-happy. There's no other way I can make up that anticipated fuel cost savings. I'm going to incur those additional HWY miles regardless.
If Hyundai did buy-back vehicles that were bought in the last 6 mos, I think it would be unprecedented for one and I don't think their public relations or reputation could afford the financial hit. Obviously, we can't get our money back selling it ourselves given a 22% typical (I think) depreciation value. I'm confident there are enough dissatisfied buyers that public consumer protection agencies will take the reigns and help us out here. I don't feel I made a stupid decision buying the automobile. I bought it in good faith expecting to get better gas mileage and paying less in fuel costs. That didn't happen.
#2- My calculated amount of 13.01 was based on 1560 miles less the 196 starting odo meter when I purchased. I feel that amount is a slap in the face and there was no calculating out what future would be. It seems to me they will reload the debit card after a yearly visit to the dealer to verify mileage. Too convenient for them, but a pain for us and the amount they're offering is way too dismal (IE the 2MPG drop). Their plan does not take into account the vastly fluctuating gas prices.
#3- If you check your financing contract (at least on mine) it showed a 'value' amount in the collateral information that contained the make, year, model and VIN. In my case the value stated was 78% of the purchase price (before tax) so a 22% depreciation after driven off the lot (seems typical).
#4- In my e-mail I mentioned that Hyundai has been promoting a multi-year campaign touting the best MPG across multiple models making them 'the most fuel efficient auto maker', among many other issues that I've read on this forum including the Kia mfr plate. To knowingly publish exaggerated MPG across that many vehicles for that long is definitely fraud and not a simple mistake. As another poster put it, to continue that approach and not address the problem at first discovery makes their standards and practices department very suspect.
#5 - I based my settlement amount on my initial calculations of the additional highway miles I was driving now times the difference in MPG from my old vehicle to the new 2013 (which was 10MPG). And then extrapolated that out over the typical 8 year period that I typically keep a vehicle times the average $/gal for 2012 Michigan. Then I added a 15% penalty amount on top of that based on their offering.
We all have been duped. In this day of gas price volatility and if a feather drops on an oil rig in the pacific gas has to go up .20/gal (an exaggeration but it is ridiculous what affects the immediacy of the jumps) MPG is one of the major considerations in purchasing a vehicle. I'd not have purchased the new Santa Fe if it reflected MPG ratings less than the 31 HWY they were touting. I did the math. I calculated out that I would be saving X amount of dollars if purchasing the vehicle. That's what I am expecting in return. That is fair compensation. It is not being suit-happy. There's no other way I can make up that anticipated fuel cost savings. I'm going to incur those additional HWY miles regardless.
If Hyundai did buy-back vehicles that were bought in the last 6 mos, I think it would be unprecedented for one and I don't think their public relations or reputation could afford the financial hit. Obviously, we can't get our money back selling it ourselves given a 22% typical (I think) depreciation value. I'm confident there are enough dissatisfied buyers that public consumer protection agencies will take the reigns and help us out here. I don't feel I made a stupid decision buying the automobile. I bought it in good faith expecting to get better gas mileage and paying less in fuel costs. That didn't happen.
I believe their plan does take into consideration the changing gas prices and how those prices vary by regions. It's stated by Hyundai here: https://hyundaimpginfo.com/overview/compensation
How do you know Hyundai "knowingly published exaggerated MPG"?
John
Looked around and found one law firm starting on a class action suit.
Firm: Hagens Berman
Contact: Robert Carey
Email: rob@hbsslaw.com
You can google Hagens Berman.
Pretty sure this won't be the only firm that will get involved.
I sent in my relevant data, but of course it is far too early to make a commitment.
Have a question for those more familiar with the Hyundai Offer: in the fine print, does accepting their offer carry an affirmation that one then holds them harmless, or words to that effect, for any other damages related to this issue?
Thanks,
John
Firm: Hagens Berman
Contact: Robert Carey
Email: rob@hbsslaw.com
You can google Hagens Berman.
Pretty sure this won't be the only firm that will get involved.
I sent in my relevant data, but of course it is far too early to make a commitment.
Have a question for those more familiar with the Hyundai Offer: in the fine print, does accepting their offer carry an affirmation that one then holds them harmless, or words to that effect, for any other damages related to this issue?
Thanks,
John
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
