Sign In Join 



What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

8668 messages,  Last post on Dec 01, 2009 at 9:54 AM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Nissan Versa, Toyota Yaris, Honda Fit, smart fortwo, MINI Cooper


Messages Page 814 of 867
1
...
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
...
867
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#8130 of 8668
Re: [andre1969] by nippononly
Nov 06, 2008 (12:54 pm)
Reply

Replying to: andre1969 (Nov 06, 2008 12:42 pm)

Oh, and just for kicks, a Toyota Echo with the stick shift scored 39/54 in the raw numbers. Something for you to shoot for, Nippononly!
 
Shoot, I can match or beat those, andre. In fact, in town I do so regularly, as my running average is 42 mpg, handily topping that 39 figure.
 
On all-highway trips, I have gotten into the low 50s on highways with an SL of 65 or less. Doing 70+ all day long with A/C running, it pulls only 46-49 mpg.
 
More power to the subcompacts!
#8131 of 8668
Re: [nippononly] by andre1969
Nov 06, 2008 (1:04 pm)
Reply

Replying to: nippononly (Nov 06, 2008 12:54 pm)

Shoot, I can match or beat those, andre. In fact, in town I do so regularly, as my running average is 42 mpg, handily topping that 39 figure.
 
I shudder to think how slow I'd have to drive my Intrepid to get its raw figures of 24 city/38 highway. Probably so slow it would be dangerous! The best I ever got was around 32.5, averaging 55-60, occasionally getting up to 65 or so, and no a/c use.
 
I guess with a stick shift being more of a direct connection, it's easier to meet or beat the EPA estimates, even old raw numbers?
#8132 of 8668
Re: [andre1969] by nippononly
Nov 06, 2008 (1:07 pm)
Reply

Replying to: andre1969 (Nov 06, 2008 1:04 pm)

I guess with a stick shift being more of a direct connection, it's easier to meet or beat the EPA estimates, even old raw numbers?
 
Oh yes, absolutely, and the smaller the engine, the more true that is, so it's particularly true for most subcompacts.
#8133 of 8668
Re: Truely stupid WSJ article [texases] by lilengineerboy
Nov 06, 2008 (1:17 pm)
Reply

Replying to: texases (Nov 06, 2008 7:47 am)

Yeah I saw that article and thought they were a bunch of idiots as well. They also mentioned driving in snow and bad weather as an issue, but I have found the cars in ditches are the SUVs and conversion vans, typically.
#8134 of 8668
Re: Truely stupid WSJ article [texases] by andre1969
Nov 06, 2008 (1:40 pm)
Reply

Replying to: texases (Nov 06, 2008 7:47 am)

I thought the story where the dude's wife, daughter, and 4 friends wanted to take a road trip but none of their cars were big enough, so he let them use his 1974 Imperial! Couldn't they have just rented a minivan? I doubt if that Imperial could get more than 15-16 mpg out on the highway unless you babied it. Heck, I'm lucky to see much more than that out of my '79 New Yorker, and it's downright dainty compared to that thing!
 
If fuel economy was such a concern, it seems to me that would be the way to go. Any minivan worth a darn should be able to get at least mid 20's on the highway, I'd imagine.
#8135 of 8668
Re: Truely stupid WSJ article [andre1969] by texases
Nov 06, 2008 (2:27 pm)
Reply

Replying to: andre1969 (Nov 06, 2008 1:40 pm)

Good point on the rental cars - that's the obvious way to go, we did it for a family trip a few year a go. What a bunch of idiots! Of course, if they talked to reasonable people, there'd be no article...
#8136 of 8668
Re: [andre1969] by ateixeira
Nov 07, 2008 (9:23 am)
Reply

Replying to: andre1969 (Nov 06, 2008 12:42 pm)

54 highway in the Echo? Yowsah. At what, 46mph? Downhill? While drafting?
#8137 of 8668
'09 fit sport manual mileage... by dhectorg
Nov 07, 2008 (9:25 am)
Reply
I've had my ;09 fit sport manual for a couple weeks and have 2 tanks of gas behind me. i've decided to track my fuel economy for the life of the car, so i can see if it actually improves as the engine wears in.
 
anyway, my 1`st tank mileage was 34mpg with a 25% highway 75% city split. my 2nd tank turned in 36mpg with a 40% highway 60% city split.
 
any any case, i'm very please with these numbers and i believe they'll only improve. i'd like to get 40+ no matter what type of driving i'm doing. only time will tell if that's possible.
 
dg
#8138 of 8668
Re: '09 fit sport manual mileage... [dhectorg] by ateixeira
Nov 07, 2008 (9:33 am)
Reply

Replying to: dhectorg (Nov 07, 2008 9:25 am)

I agree - those are some good numbers with a green engine.
#8139 of 8668
Re: '09 fit sport manual mileage... [ateixeira] by boaz47
Nov 07, 2008 (10:06 am)
Reply

Replying to: ateixeira (Nov 07, 2008 9:33 am)

I still have a problem with sub compacts not getting better fuel mileage than they do. In 2002 I bought a Saturn SL and traded in my old Dodge RamCharger. After a few weeks I needed a second car to commute with so I could leave the SL home for my wife. I picked up a 95 or 96 SC-1 to drive daily. Now I will admit the car got more freeway miles than city driving but I could pull in 40 MPG fairly regularly. 36 was my average. The SL got closer to 32 average and sometimes when it didn't see the freeway it got 28. Now close to seven years later the cars are even smaller and still they are in the 30s. One of my cycling club friends has a Smart and he gets 40, half the car and the same mileage as my old Saturn. I can also remember many in these forums assuring us the Smart would get better mileage but the proof is in the numbers.
 
If I am going to give up comfort and utility then they are going to have to give me a better price and better fuel mileage.

Messages Page 814 of 867
1
...
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
...
867
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement