Midsize Sedans 2.0

Replying to: mickeyrom (Aug 11, 2008 4:09 am)

Replies to this message:
• mz6greyghost (Aug 11, 2008 6:28 am)
  • thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 6:32 am)
    • akirby (Aug 11, 2008 7:42 am) and 20 more...

Replying to: madpistol (Aug 11, 2008 5:29 am)

Replies to this message:
• thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 6:32 am)
  • akirby (Aug 11, 2008 7:42 am)
    • thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 7:47 am) and 19 more...

Replying to: mz6greyghost (Aug 11, 2008 6:28 am)

Replies to this message:
• akirby (Aug 11, 2008 7:42 am)
  • thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 7:47 am)
    • akirby (Aug 11, 2008 7:58 am) and 8 more...
    • jeffyscott (Aug 11, 2008 11:52 am) and 9 more...

Replying to: thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 6:32 am)

Replies to this message:
• thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 7:47 am)
  • akirby (Aug 11, 2008 7:58 am)
    • thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 8:08 am) and 7 more...
  • jeffyscott (Aug 11, 2008 11:52 am)
    • thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 12:00 pm) and 8 more...

Replies to this message:
• mz6greyghost (Aug 11, 2008 7:50 am)
  • thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 7:52 am)

Replying to: akirby (Aug 11, 2008 7:42 am)

Considering the raw EPA numbers for my car were in the mid-40s, 37 isn't that abnormal. I've had 40 MPG on a couple of occasions.
 
Oh yeah, to answer your inquiry, my Garmin GPS has matched my odometer on 275 mile trips (I take the same trip every few weeks) to within a couple of miles, every time.
 
My average in suburban commuting in off-rush-hour times is 30 MPG here in Birmingham, AL. Right now, I wouldn't trade this car for anything.
 
I'm not alone with this type of highway mileage, either. Check out the Honda Accord MPG forum if you'd like, many people have gotten great highway mileage.

Replies to this message:
• akirby (Aug 11, 2008 7:58 am)
  • thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 8:08 am)
    • plekto (Aug 11, 2008 11:34 am) and 6 more...
• jeffyscott (Aug 11, 2008 11:52 am)
  • thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 12:00 pm)
    • aviboy97 (Aug 11, 2008 12:04 pm) and 6 more...
    • madpistol (Aug 11, 2008 2:20 pm)

Replying to: thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 7:44 am)

What do you expect? It's a Buick...

Replies to this message:
• thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 7:52 am)

Replying to: mz6greyghost (Aug 11, 2008 7:50 am)

Compared to the classy-looking (to me) Lucerne and the overystyled LaCrosse, it just seems so DUUULLLLLLLL.

Replying to: thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 7:47 am)

Replies to this message:
• thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 8:08 am)
  • plekto (Aug 11, 2008 11:34 am)
    • thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 11:45 am) and 5 more...

Replying to: akirby (Aug 11, 2008 7:58 am)

The old EPA system (the one that rated my car at 24/34 and not at 21/31) was actually dumbed down significantly from what the EPA really achieved. I remember the highway number for my car was well into the forties. I can't find the table right now but will search for it for ya.
 
EDIT: Found it. The EPA numbers uncorrected for my 2006 Accord 2.4L 5AT are City: 27.0145 Hwy: 43.4831
 
See them yourself at the link I provide below. Click the year of vehicle you wish to see. You'll have to unzip a datafile into Excel to do it (really easy). Then just find your vehicle in the file. They are sorted by EPA class (2-seater, Subcompact, Compact, etc).
 
Link to FuelEconomy.gov Raw Numbers
 

Replies to this message:
• plekto (Aug 11, 2008 11:34 am)
  • thegraduate (Aug 11, 2008 11:45 am)
    • plekto (Aug 11, 2008 6:05 pm) and 4 more...