Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Thursday June 30, 2016
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC Subaru Models > Impreza Forum

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads. 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-01-2013, 07:53 AM   #4676
hemophilic
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 301213
Join Date: Nov 2011
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Raleigh, NC
Vehicle:
2012 Imp. Sp. Ltd.
Blue/Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeeper View Post

Wow, sounds like you need your own site, titled: "Drive fast, you use more gas, but your time is worth it! With the time you save, you can sit in front of a computer and complain about your poor fuel economy!".com

Your time is so valuable, yet you waste tons of it here, on a site, complaining about a problem and filing paperwork with the EPA that will yield you nothing. Add that to the inconsistencies...

That is your blinders on again. It tells you where they got the graph, from fueleconomy.gov.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/video...small_wide.wmv

P.S. By the way, nice dodge, the question I asked was: "How close is their generic calculation to what you achieve with your impreza?" (when you drive it 80mpg on the highway)

That lame-ass site guestimates 25.9mpg, how close are they to what you get?

Are you afraid to answer?
Lol'ing

I drive much like the fe.gov/motorweek guy suggests except 5mph over the speed limit at all times. I don't think 5 over is too slow. And yet here I sit with magical elusive super mpg powers. Like I said, broken cars and bad behavior can be fixed.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
hemophilic is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Old 08-01-2013, 04:42 PM   #4677
myrt1987
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 323103
Join Date: Jun 2012
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Maple Shade NJ
Vehicle:
2012 Limited 2.0i
Dreamy Gray Mistress

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hemophilic View Post
Lol'ing
+1 you guys are crazy
myrt1987 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2013, 05:09 PM   #4678
flyboy1100
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

First fill of 91 e0 was 32.7 mpg, pretty good for my normal commute.

Now I'm on my Roadtrip, filled with 91 again before leaving, and driving 77mph, we will see what I get, all up hill too, started at 900ft elevation, will end around 3700ft today
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2013, 05:24 PM   #4679
Caocao
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 330507
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Ottawa
Vehicle:
2015 Jetta TDI
Pure White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy1100 View Post
First fill of 91 e0 was 32.7 mpg, pretty good for my normal commute.

Now I'm on my Roadtrip, filled with 91 again before leaving, and driving 77mph, we will see what I get, all up hill too, started at 900ft elevation, will end around 3700ft today
You need to drive at 80 mph uphill, slower would be dangerous. True story bro!
Caocao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2013, 06:14 PM   #4680
flyboy1100
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Caocao View Post

You need to drive at 80 mph uphill, slower would be dangerous. True story bro!
Maybe that is where I went wrong.


first fill up, 28.2mpg, 77mph, 10mph headwind entire time. About what I expected.
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2013, 06:19 PM   #4681
nubsub
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 313575
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza 2.0i HB

Default MPG as a function of speed (by the tankful)

so, i finally got around to compiling my data over the first 12k+ on my CVT Impreza, and here is the result of plotting the average tank speed vs MPG (average speed as reported by the computer, and miles per gallon hand calculated):



as you can see, no surprise: the worse the stop and go traffic, the worse the mileage. I should note a few things: i mostly drive around suburbia and hence only have a few decent highway trips out of all of those tankfuls. yet, even those primarily highway trip (90%), top out at below 50mph average because i ended up either in town for a good stretch at the ends of those trips or hit some horrible stop and go traffic in the middle (the 36+ mpg tank).

while i don't believe a linear model is the best in a general sense, it doesn't fit the data too badly. i'm sure if i drove more highway miles and didn't have those slow stretches, the curve would start diving down for higher MPH tanks. and of course, clearly the MPG wouldn't be nonzero for a speed of zero!

i should also note that the four worst outliers under the best fit line were from the past winter when i had the Defrost" button engaged 100% of the time so the AC compressor was constantly cycling. discounting those, the collapse of the data points is pretty fair such that by just looking at my average MPH on a tank, i could pretty fairly guess my MPG for the tank.
nubsub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2013, 01:52 AM   #4682
flyboy1100
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

2nd half of our trip looks to be 31ish mpg at 78mph, slight tailwind, less climbing, won't know until tomorrow when I fill (usually beat dash indicated mpg though)

Car has plenty of power to climb big hills w/o losing more than a few mph in 5th gear, if any at all. My old car would drop out of overdrive to climb those hills (I have done this drive a lot!). So for those of you who complain about it, obviously your hill is abnormally steep (you know who you are)
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2013, 07:03 AM   #4683
Zeeper
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Upstate NY
Vehicle:
2015 WRX CVT
White

Default

"How close is their generic calculation to what you achieve with your impreza?" (when you drive it 80mph on the highway)

That lame-ass site guestimates 25.9mpg, how close are they to what you get?

Are you afraid to answer?


Tick, tock, tick, tock....
Zeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2013, 07:23 AM   #4684
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy1100 View Post
2nd half of our trip looks to be 31ish mpg at 78mph, slight tailwind, less climbing, won't know until tomorrow when I fill (usually beat dash indicated mpg though)

Car has plenty of power to climb big hills w/o losing more than a few mph in 5th gear, if any at all. My old car would drop out of overdrive to climb those hills (I have done this drive a lot!). So for those of you who complain about it, obviously your hill is abnormally steep (you know who you are)
Really? I haven't heard of anyone complaining about dropping out of gear with the 5MT. Who was that?
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2013, 07:35 AM   #4685
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeeper View Post
"How close is their generic calculation to what you achieve with your impreza?" (when you drive it 80mph on the highway)

That lame-ass site guestimates 25.9mpg, how close are they to what you get?

Are you afraid to answer?


Tick, tock, tick, tock....
LOL. You mean that site that says your commute is only extended by ____ minutes per day, then says you would save _______ dollars per year while working 365 days per year to beef up the cost? That site is for simpletons who can't do their own math and blindly follow propaganda.

We know how it compares with other cars via Consumer Reports, fuelly, mpgomatic, etc. so take that "lame-ass" site and shove it, because most cars highly exceed their "estimate" under the conditions it takes to achieve it with the CVT WHICH YOU DON'T HAVE and you know it.

Aaarghhh - Bozo has sucked me into a shouting match
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2013, 08:44 AM   #4686
flyboy1100
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Really? I haven't heard of anyone complaining about dropping out of gear with the 5MT. Who was that?


You know exactly who I'm talking about, and I'm not talking about a 5sp dropping out of gear. The cvt's "6th"gear ratio is just a little smaller than the 5sp 5th, so if your car doesn't have power to climb the hill in that gear, it is abnormally steep. I had 2 adults and about 200lbs of gear in the back too

I'm 100% positive you just like to argue about anything, it doesn't matter what, you will argue the opposite side.

Last edited by flyboy1100; 08-02-2013 at 08:52 AM.
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2013, 08:54 AM   #4687
Zeeper
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Upstate NY
Vehicle:
2015 WRX CVT
White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeeper View Post
"How close is their generic calculation to what you achieve with your impreza?" (when you drive it 80mph on the highway)

That lame-ass site guestimates 25.9mpg, how close are they to what you get?

Are you afraid to answer?

Tick, tock, tick, tock....
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
LOL. You mean that site that says your commute is only extended by ____ minutes per day, then says you would save _______ dollars per year while working 365 days per year to beef up the cost? That site is for simpletons who can't do their own math and blindly follow propaganda.
In other words, that "lameass site" must be very close to predicting your actual mileage when you drive your impreza 80mph.

Funny how math works, you plug in some known variables, and Stevenhnm starts squirming/equivocating.

Seems he only likes math and science when it confirms his pre-existing notions.

What was that quote again?

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
That's cool. But you don't have to be an engineer to "get it" - a real engineer (as opposed to a plug-and-chugger) will, and most other people can. I was referring to some people here not being able to look at facts and change their opinion.

"When my information changes, I change my mind. What do you do?"
(John Maynard Keynes)
ROFLMAO

Last edited by Zeeper; 08-02-2013 at 01:07 PM.
Zeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2013, 10:47 AM   #4688
G2Spfld
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 354284
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:
2013 Imp Sport CVT
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeeper View Post

In other words, that "lameass site" must be very close to predicting your actual mileage when you drive your impreza 80mph.

Funny how math works, you plug in some known variables, and Stevenhnm starts squirming. Seems he only likes math and science when it confirms his pre-existing notions.

What was that quote again?

ROFLMAO
Anyone whom likes to quote Keynes, just doesn't get it. The math for Keynesian economics doesn't add up, in fact its created, then recreated, then recreated. My gut feeling was he took a certain position ( without getting into politics) and would argue a point till the next point to argue came along. I also had a senator and a representative for uncles. Different sides of the isle too. I spent half my life hearing the aforementioned views and arguments pro/ con. I learned if you are pro Keynesian , facts do not matter, truth does not matter, history as it happened does not matter. The only thing that matters is keeping the topic in their hands and as pliable as they can. Then use insults and name calling if they feel any resistance or challenging of the topic. As if everybody else is weak enough that a couple insults would break them. ;-)
G2Spfld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2013, 12:11 PM   #4689
richde
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 79498
Join Date: Jan 2005
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: SCIC's trashy neighbor
Vehicle:
2013 XV

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by G2Spfld View Post
Anyone whom likes to quote Keynes, just doesn't get it. The math for Keynesian economics doesn't add up, in fact its created, then recreated, then recreated. My gut feeling was he took a certain position ( without getting into politics) and would argue a point till the next point to argue came along. I also had a senator and a representative for uncles. Different sides of the isle too. I spent half my life hearing the aforementioned views and arguments pro/ con. I learned if you are pro Keynesian , facts do not matter, truth does not matter, history as it happened does not matter. The only thing that matters is keeping the topic in their hands and as pliable as they can. Then use insults and name calling if they feel any resistance or challenging of the topic. As if everybody else is weak enough that a couple insults would break them. ;-)

Spending when you have to and saving when you can doesn't add up? It's pretty damn simple, the only problem is that when the time comes to start saving, people refuse to. It doesn't "add up" simply because people don't do it.

OTOH, trying to set policy by disregarding empirical evidence is little more than faith based retardation.

But the Keynes quote is basic common sense, try giving your ideology a rest once and a while.
richde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2013, 12:16 PM   #4690
G2Spfld
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 354284
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:
2013 Imp Sport CVT
SWP

Default

That's why I mentioned 99% of his I disagreed with. This one in particular fits within that 1%. But I would never go around quoting Keynes for 1% of his quotes.
G2Spfld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2013, 10:43 PM   #4691
Sherb
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 8883
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Louisville, KY
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
Blue

Default

I took my car to the dealer, and the service guy said you have to read the fine print on my sales sticker.... something about the average new vehicle gets 23 MPG and wagons get between 14 to 34 MPG. I wanted to slap this guy silly. He also said some other guy was complaining also but after 13k miles, it finally got close to advertised mpg. Well guy is opening a case with Subaru and I gave spreadsheet on how I got 23 MPG on my hwy trip to NY. Though I was doing 70-80 and I am seeing now maybe that's why its low based on recent comments.

My trip B has like 2200 miles since the trip and it says 23.4 MPG. I did the test about 45 mph, the real time display is saying I am getting 30-40 MPG on a flat road cruise on. At about 65 mph, the display was more like 35-45 MPG. Seems good but any descent acceleration (3k rpms) I do see more like 5-15 MPG from any speed, lol.
Sherb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2013, 10:58 PM   #4692
G2Spfld
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 354284
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:
2013 Imp Sport CVT
SWP

Default

The only thing the instant is good for is, well nothing really. You have the dial on dash like BMW's do/ used to anyway that helps to nudge you into being more aware of throttle position in any given situation. You can't watch instant mpg readout then use it for a basis of explanation or argument.

I'd like anyone who is getting poor milage and posting it, to also say whether or not they have roof rack or cross bars ( loaded or unloaded) and type of fuel grade being used. This might give us info showing factors that may help or hurt. I know taking my rack off, and running non ethanol 91 oct gave me 3-4 mpg increase vs having rack on and running 91 with 10% ethanol.

I heard someone complaining about poor mpg locally, then I saw their car and had a cargo basket with luggage in it. That goes along with thinking you can drive 75 up massive hills with air and still get over 30 mpg much less 36 mpg.
G2Spfld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2013, 11:48 PM   #4693
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Actually the instantaneous readout is good for understanding when and where mpg's suffer with a CVT. The higher the rpm, the more gas it uses. when climbing a gentle grade or with a headwind that the 5MT could (allegedly) handle in 5th, the mpg's really suffer. Really milking the throttle can get you up over those hills without "downshifting" but I'd watch my rear view mirror - it's just not worth the risk. I could probably get 40 mpg at 70 mph, if I sped up to 90 going downhill and slowed to 40 going uphill without letting it rev, but staying with traffic the mpg just sucks compared to other cars. 6th is too high to keep up and 5th on the flat is around 20 mpg, if I recall. I don't drive it much because it costs me too much. Wifee commutes with it in town, mostly. But at least I HAVE driven it
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2013, 11:51 PM   #4694
flyboy1100
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Instant is perfect in my case, but I had it adjusted at the dealer.

Filled up today with 85.5, ethanol content unknown but guessing 10%, drove 421.2 miles, used 11.7 gallons, 36.0mpg!!!! Elevation started at 3600ft, peaked at 11,000ft, a lot of it was between 7000-9000ft. This was my best tank ever today, hardly ever got to 5th gear because car has zero power above 5000ft it seems. Anyway hardly ever used 4th and 5th today, a lot of 2nd and 3rd.

I'm 100% pleased.
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2013, 12:04 AM   #4695
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by G2Spfld View Post
Anyone whom likes to quote Keynes, just doesn't get it. The math for Keynesian economics doesn't add up, in fact its created, then recreated, then recreated. My gut feeling was he took a certain position ( without getting into politics) and would argue a point till the next point to argue came along. I also had a senator and a representative for uncles. Different sides of the isle too. I spent half my life hearing the aforementioned views and arguments pro/ con. I learned if you are pro Keynesian , facts do not matter, truth does not matter, history as it happened does not matter. The only thing that matters is keeping the topic in their hands and as pliable as they can. Then use insults and name calling if they feel any resistance or challenging of the topic. As if everybody else is weak enough that a couple insults would break them. ;-)
I'm not an economist. All I know about Keynes is that quote, which makes a lot of sense. When you have 3 reputable or relatively large databases on your side vs. a few anecdotes and a website that can't get the math right and compares apples to oranges, you should look at the possibility that the people talking about a relatively large variability might have something. You can either stick to your guns like a blockhead or reassess. Or, actually get some personal experience with it
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2013, 12:05 AM   #4696
G2Spfld
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 354284
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:
2013 Imp Sport CVT
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy1100 View Post
Instant is perfect in my case, but I had it adjusted at the dealer.

Filled up today with 85.5, ethanol content unknown but guessing 10%, drove 421.2 miles, used 11.7 gallons, 36.0mpg!!!! Elevation started at 3600ft, peaked at 11,000ft, a lot of it was between 7000-9000ft. This was my best tank ever today, hardly ever got to 5th gear because car has zero power above 5000ft it seems. Anyway hardly ever used 4th and 5th today, a lot of 2nd and 3rd.

I'm 100% pleased.
Interesting, higher RPM'S in lower gear, yet yielded best mpg's? The higher elevation, less Oxygen. Less oxygen, less combustion, hence less fuel burned. But higher RPM'S to maximize power with the amount of fuel burned ( ie power vs gearing). This is the perfect explanation to my point before that higher RPM'S does not necessarily mean lower mpg's. Glad you posted this!! Great mpg with that elevation change.
G2Spfld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2013, 12:09 AM   #4697
G2Spfld
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 354284
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:
2013 Imp Sport CVT
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
Actually the instantaneous readout is good for understanding when and where mpg's suffer with a CVT. The higher the rpm, the more gas it uses. when climbing a gentle grade or with a headwind that the 5MT could (allegedly) handle in 5th, the mpg's really suffer. Really milking the throttle can get you up over those hills without "downshifting" but I'd watch my rear view mirror - it's just not worth the risk. I could probably get 40 mpg at 70 mph, if I sped up to 90 going downhill and slowed to 40 going uphill without letting it rev, but staying with traffic the mpg just sucks compared to other cars. 6th is too high to keep up and 5th on the flat is around 20 mpg, if I recall. I don't drive it much because it costs me too much. Wifee commutes with it in town, mostly. But at least I HAVE driven it
It is, but that's also the exact reason that dial was put on the gauge face too. It's just more convenient to see while your driving than the center cluster.
G2Spfld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2013, 12:34 AM   #4698
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by G2Spfld View Post
Interesting, higher RPM'S in lower gear, yet yielded best mpg's? The higher elevation, less Oxygen. Less oxygen, less combustion, hence less fuel burned. But higher RPM'S to maximize power with the amount of fuel burned ( ie power vs gearing). This is the perfect explanation to my point before that higher RPM'S does not necessarily mean lower mpg's. Glad you posted this!! Great mpg with that elevation change.
Mostly true - less oxygen because of less air so less fuel burned at a specific throttle position. However, with modern fuel monitoring systems even a dirty air filter won't hurt your mpg's - just your horsepower.

The big change at altitude is wind resistance - and the biggest drag on mpg is wind resistance - so it makes a big difference. At 10,000 feet air pressure is only 10 psi vs. 14.7 at sea level, and since we're talking about a cross sectional area pushing the air out of the way, wind resistance factor is a squared function (not "exponential" like a lame-ass website would say). So at 10,000 feet wind resistance is only one third of what it is at sea level. At the average elevation of my commute of 6,000 feet, wind resistance is only two thirds of what it is at sea level - which is a big factor in my commuter vehicle (aka La Corolla) getting 40 mpg at 80 mph, while being rated at 36 mpg highway EPA.



However, despite several tries in different circumstances, I still have been unable to achieve higher mpg by downshifting. Any factual circumstances there (other than lugging the engine in the higher gear)?
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2013, 12:35 AM   #4699
flyboy1100
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by G2Spfld View Post

It is, but that's also the exact reason that dial was put on the gauge face too. It's just more convenient to see while your driving than the center cluster.
But the gauge on the cluster constantly is changing based upon the current average mpg. Either way, mine is accurate (underreports actually) indicated 35.4 @ fillup.

And the power band for this engine seems to be like 2700-5000, most of my driving today was in the 3400-4000rpm range
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2013, 01:07 AM   #4700
G2Spfld
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 354284
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:
2013 Imp Sport CVT
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post

Mostly true - less oxygen because of less air so less fuel burned at a specific throttle position. However, with modern fuel monitoring systems even a dirty air filter won't hurt your mpg's - just your horsepower.

The big change at altitude is wind resistance - and the biggest drag on mpg is wind resistance - so it makes a big difference. At 10,000 feet air pressure is only 10 psi vs. 14.7 at sea level, and since we're talking about a cross sectional area pushing the air out of the way, wind resistance factor is a squared function (not "exponential" like a lame-ass website would say). So at 10,000 feet wind resistance is only one third of what it is at sea level. At the average elevation of my commute of 6,000 feet, wind resistance is only two thirds of what it is at sea level - which is a big factor in my commuter vehicle (aka La Corolla) getting 40 mpg at 80 mph, while being rated at 36 mpg highway EPA.



However, despite several tries in different circumstances, I still have been unable to achieve higher mpg by downshifting. Any factual circumstances there (other than lugging the engine in the higher gear)?
Air filter affects both mpg and HP
G2Spfld is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Impreza owner, low mpg? stuffedcabbage Newbies & FAQs 34 09-25-2012 10:10 PM
2012 Impreza Reviewed - Whytecliff to Seymour brendan_mac Vancouver Impreza Club Forum -- VIC 16 12-23-2011 01:12 PM
NJ Impreza owners - sighting Dan G General Forum Archive 76 10-06-2000 12:24 AM
Md or Va Impreza owners - I have an Impreza related question. Snoopy General Forum Archive 1 06-05-2000 08:08 AM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2016 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2016, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.