Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Tuesday September 2, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > Warranty Issues & SOA Problems

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 12-03-2012, 02:09 PM   #301
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

And from this forum we've learned that the Impreza won't return the EPA numbers if you drive it 70-85mph on the highway (I already knew this, but it seems like an unwelcome revelation to stevehnm). Again the EPA HWY testing is not testing for this scenario, so the HWY number on the car does not reflect this type of driving.

For every driver with low MPG's, there are more drivers who are hitting the EPA numbers (look at Fuelly). That tells you the role of the driver in achieving those numbers.
I'm not quite sure why you keep slinging my name in the mud.

I've told you time and time again this is not about my opinion. This is about the failure of the CVT (which you don't even have so again, I'm not sure why you're even in this conversation) to get anywhere near the mpg's that Subaru told the EPA it would get, and that is compared to Consumer Reports as well as other test driving (not to mention several drivers here who *do* have the cvt).

Neither you nor flyboy can get the numbers Subaru published with the cvt because you don't have one.

Pull your head out. Or do you work for Subaru or a dealer or are you just unable to understand that the cvt is not the same transmission as the 5 speed?
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 02:13 PM   #302
Zeeper
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Albany NY
Vehicle:
2012 Sport 5MT
Green/Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post

I'm not quite sure why you keep slinging my name in the mud.

I've told you time and time again this is not about my opinion. This is about the failure of the CVT (which you don't even have so again, I'm not sure why you're even in this conversation) to get anywhere near the mpg's that Subaru told the EPA it would get, and that is compared to Consumer Reports as well as other test driving (not to mention several drivers here who *do* have the cvt).

Neither you nor flyboy can get the numbers Subaru published with the cvt because you don't have one.

Pull your head out. Or do you work for Subaru or a dealer or are you just unable to understand that you don't have one?
When you trade your cvt in for a 5 speed (hilarious that you are thinking of doing that) and your MPG's don't improve during your current drive, will you admit that the fault isn't the transmission but the speed you're driving the car?
Zeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 02:17 PM   #303
Opie
Floresbian
Moderator
 
Member#: 470
Join Date: Oct 1999
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Riverview, Florida - U.S.A.
Vehicle:
2015 Forester 2.0XT
'14 XV Crosstrek, '99 SF

Default

You guys do realize the EPA numbers are in their own little bubble right? They even use their own specially blended fuel to do their testing on a dyno over a simulated driving test. The EPA MPG should only be used to compare MPG between different vehicles, not assume that it is actual, real world achievable mileage. Some cars may be closer in the real world, others may be further apart. It's certainly not worth 16 pages of arguing over.

Oh...and stevehnm, SOA doesn't tell the EPA the MPG numbers....the EPA tests the cars and publishes the numbers they get...for SOA and anyone else to see and use.
Opie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 02:21 PM   #304
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Opie View Post
You guys do realize the EPA numbers are in their own little bubble right? They even use their own specially blended fuel to do their testing on a dyno over a simulated driving test. The EPA MPG should only be used to compare MPG between different vehicles, not assume that it is actual, real world achievable mileage. Some cars may be closer in the real world, others may be further apart. It's certainly not worth 16 pages of arguing over.

Oh...and stevehnm, SOA doesn't tell the EPA the MPG numbers....the EPA tests the cars and publishes the numbers they get...for SOA and anyone else to see and use.
some of us DO understand, others, well they are just ignorant

but the EPA doesn't test every vehicle, they only test a few samples
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 03:55 PM   #305
Knotsure
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 41730
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Jersey
Vehicle:
0910 Leggy3.0/Impr
BLU Leg/BLK Imp

Default

FWIW - when I provided the mileage my family is getting it is in a cvt Impreza. Just sayin'....they are still getting great mileage. I haven't asked for specifics lately...
Knotsure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 04:10 PM   #306
aeoporta
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 334126
Join Date: Oct 2012
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: New York
Vehicle:
2013 5mt Sp Premium
Venetian Red & Dark Gray

Default

this thread always makes my day. have the cvt drivers attempted a higher psi for tires or seeing if they could switch to a synthetic trans fluid and if that provided any increase mpg/performance boost. The only cvt vehicle I had I got rid of pretty quickly since I got it for free and was a money pit so I am not very up to snuff on cvt performance in general.
keep up the debate guys so far from my reading an excellent case is being made for the 5spd over auto 6spd.
aeoporta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 04:35 PM   #307
ocellaris
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 302559
Join Date: Nov 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aeoporta View Post
this thread always makes my day. have the cvt drivers attempted a higher psi for tires or seeing if they could switch to a synthetic trans fluid and if that provided any increase mpg/performance boost. The only cvt vehicle I had I got rid of pretty quickly since I got it for free and was a money pit so I am not very up to snuff on cvt performance in general.
keep up the debate guys so far from my reading an excellent case is being made for the 5spd over auto 6spd.
A lot of the earlier owners (like myself) were driving around their cars with 42+ PSI in the tires. Apparently Subaru ships them with high PSI so they move less in transit, and dealers were not check tires pretty for PDI. When I lowered the pressure, I didn't notice any change.

Also running anything other than Subaru CVT fluid in the transmission voids the warranty. I haven't seen any aftermarket fluids that meet Subaru specs.
ocellaris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 05:53 PM   #308
JC
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 692
Join Date: Dec 1999
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Vehicle:
2006 Pontiac GTO M6
Triumph Street Triple R

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_24 View Post
Lets see the Combined MPG EPA rating for a Prius C is 50. Edmunds is getting 44.9.

Edmunds even admits to driving the Impreza rather agressively.

The ford Focus is rated at 26MPG combined, yet Edmunds only gets 20.5mpg, with a worst of 13!
Does the Prius also being off negate all the other cars that aren't? That Focus is an ST that they've taken to the track and auto-x'ing. I hardly think that's a far comparison.
JC is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 09:46 PM   #309
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
When you trade your cvt in for a 5 speed (hilarious that you are thinking of doing that) and your MPG's don't improve during your current drive, will you admit that the fault isn't the transmission but the speed you're driving the car?
There you go again, off in lala land, putting ridiculous words in my mouth. When have I ever said I was thinking of trading my cvt in on a 5 speed?

You just have no clue what reality is, do you?
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 10:22 PM   #310
Zeeper
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Albany NY
Vehicle:
2012 Sport 5MT
Green/Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
There you go again, off in lala land, putting ridiculous words in my mouth. When have I ever said I was thinking of trading my cvt in on a 5 speed?

You just have no clue what reality is, do you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
Let us know what you get for it... I may trade mine in, but it would probably just be for a 5 speed instead of the cvt I have now.
TDI thread, Impreza forum (here is a link):

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2438697

Are either of your multiple personalities schizophrenic?
Zeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 10:34 PM   #311
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
TDI thread, Impreza forum (here is a link):

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2438697

Are either of your multiple personalities schizophrenic?
You got me on that one. What is that, about 25 to one?

See, just be honest. Give it a try.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 10:54 PM   #312
Zeeper
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Albany NY
Vehicle:
2012 Sport 5MT
Green/Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
You got me on that one. What is that, about 25 to one?

See, just be honest. Give it a try.
Ok, I am pretty sure that the 5 speed revs higher than the CVT at highway speeds. If that is the case, the 5 speed returns lower HWY numbers because the engine is working harder.

I don't get your contention that the CVT is worse on the HWY because it is downshifting too much. Can't you paddle shift it up into "6th"?

If it is downshifting, is it because you are driving it 75mph or because it does that at any speed when it hits a hill?

You think you want a 5 speed, but you need to know that on the HWY when you hit a substantial hill the car needs to be downshifted as well, because with cruise on it cannot maintain speed and starts to slow down.
Zeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 12:58 AM   #313
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
Ok, I am pretty sure that the 5 speed revs higher than the CVT at highway speeds. If that is the case, the 5 speed returns lower HWY numbers because the engine is working harder.

I don't get your contention that the CVT is worse on the HWY because it is downshifting too much. Can't you paddle shift it up into "6th"?

If it is downshifting, is it because you are driving it 75mph or because it does that at any speed when it hits a hill?

You think you want a 5 speed, but you need to know that on the HWY when you hit a substantial hill the car needs to be downshifted as well, because with cruise on it cannot maintain speed and starts to slow down.
On absolutely flat terrain the cvt maintains high gear. It doesn't take much of a hill to make it downshift. It is just geared too high for reality - it may be tuned for the EPA test, but that is not reality. Cars that are tuned for reality correlate well on the EPA test. The Impreza cvt is a statistical outlier. Reading into the recent discussions it appears the cvt may be easily tunable, so could be tuned to maximize mpg on the EPA test quickly in realtime, vs. maximizing mpg for owners (As in maybe somebody should be fired for essentially cheating).

The faster the cruise is set for, the earlier the cvt downshifts on hills, so sucks more gas than the mpgomatic curve at speed. I admit the mpgomatic curve is applicable with a manual transmission and no downshifting. The 5 speed (geared lower according to the literature - what are you turning at 60 mph?) will stay in high for much longer with its lower gearing, and maybe lose a few mph. 10 mph is generally the threshold for kicking off on other brand manual transmissions that I am familiar with - yes, including the Corolla for one, that gets 6 mpg better on the highway (it was 8 when the sube was new) than the sube cvt even though it's rated the same 36 mpg highway. I am sure your 5 speed works the same way, although the threshold for dropping out of cruise control may be different. The cvt slow a lot before dropping out - I don't know what it actually kicks out at yet - it is much lower than 10 mph less. It will hit third at over 5,000 rpm and pull a hill quite well, although it's getting less than 10 mpg when doing so.

When talking economy, it is better to slow a little going up hills than downshift (as in extensively with the Impreza cvt). So, combining the elevation gain with the wind resistance (as in Euler - all Bernoulli did was integrate Euler's equation so I refuse to give him credit) the cvt downshifts earlier with higher speeds which compounds the increase in fuel consumption.

Looking globally at the discussion, I would bet that the 5 speed gets more than 3 mpg less than the cvt, (e.g. cvt reality might be 30 in a certain situation, and the 5 speed might be the same, vs. 36 and 33) and may in fact get better mpg on a real highway, unless going very slow (<60 or 65) and on flatland.

P.S. If I had it to do over again, I would buy the 5 speed, but with what I would lose in $ it's not worth it to trade it in.

P.S. #2: How many other cars get more mpg's with the automatic than the manual?
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 06:43 AM   #314
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Almost all new cars with 6speed autos or cvts I think are rated for higher than their manual counterparts
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 07:19 AM   #315
Zeeper
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Albany NY
Vehicle:
2012 Sport 5MT
Green/Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
On absolutely flat terrain the cvt maintains high gear. It doesn't take much of a hill to make it downshift. It is just geared too high for reality - it may be tuned for the EPA test, but that is not reality. Cars that are tuned for reality correlate well on the EPA test. The Impreza cvt is a statistical outlier. Reading into the recent discussions it appears the cvt may be easily tunable, so could be tuned to maximize mpg on the EPA test quickly in realtime, vs. maximizing mpg for owners (As in maybe somebody should be fired for essentially cheating).

The faster the cruise is set for, the earlier the cvt downshifts on hills, so sucks more gas than the mpgomatic curve at speed. I admit the mpgomatic curve is applicable with a manual transmission and no downshifting. The 5 speed (geared lower according to the literature - what are you turning at 60 mph?) will stay in high for much longer with its lower gearing, and maybe lose a few mph. 10 mph is generally the threshold for kicking off on other brand manual transmissions that I am familiar with - yes, including the Corolla for one, that gets 6 mpg better on the highway (it was 8 when the sube was new) than the sube cvt even though it's rated the same 36 mpg highway. I am sure your 5 speed works the same way, although the threshold for dropping out of cruise control may be different. The cvt slow a lot before dropping out - I don't know what it actually kicks out at yet - it is much lower than 10 mph less. It will hit third at over 5,000 rpm and pull a hill quite well, although it's getting less than 10 mpg when doing so.

When talking economy, it is better to slow a little going up hills than downshift (as in extensively with the Impreza cvt). So, combining the elevation gain with the wind resistance (as in Euler - all Bernoulli did was integrate Euler's equation so I refuse to give him credit) the cvt downshifts earlier with higher speeds which compounds the increase in fuel consumption.

Looking globally at the discussion, I would bet that the 5 speed gets more than 3 mpg less than the cvt, (e.g. cvt reality might be 30 in a certain situation, and the 5 speed might be the same, vs. 36 and 33) and may in fact get better mpg on a real highway, unless going very slow (<60 or 65) and on flatland.

P.S. If I had it to do over again, I would buy the 5 speed, but with what I would lose in $ it's not worth it to trade it in.

P.S. #2: How many other cars get more mpg's with the automatic than the manual?
I don't think your theory that the 5speed performs relatively better than the CVT is sound.

Sorry, it certainly is elaborate, I just don't think it is true. I think the same driver in the same conditions would pull better MPG's out of the CVT -- except maybe in the CITY if the torque converter isn't locking up in cold short drives.

I'd rather drive a 5 speed any day, but I didn't buy one because I thought it would outperform the CVT MPG wise.

On a side note, I don't think Subara geared the CVT to excell at the EPA test but suck in daily driving either, and all of the auto mags that have tested the car think it performs pretty well, no one has said the car is better on paper than on the road that I have read. I think that this statement keeps popping up among dissatisfied owners here, but is a poorly constructed theory based upon the available evidence (very good auto reviews all around).
Zeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 10:28 AM   #316
pgh88
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 316756
Join Date: Apr 2012
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
On absolutely flat terrain the cvt maintains high gear. It doesn't take much of a hill to make it downshift. It is just geared too high for reality - it may be tuned for the EPA test, but that is not reality. Cars that are tuned for reality correlate well on the EPA test. The Impreza cvt is a statistical outlier. Reading into the recent discussions it appears the cvt may be easily tunable, so could be tuned to maximize mpg on the EPA test quickly in realtime, vs. maximizing mpg for owners (As in maybe somebody should be fired for essentially cheating).

The faster the cruise is set for, the earlier the cvt downshifts on hills, so sucks more gas than the mpgomatic curve at speed. I admit the mpgomatic curve is applicable with a manual transmission and no downshifting. The 5 speed (geared lower according to the literature - what are you turning at 60 mph?) will stay in high for much longer with its lower gearing, and maybe lose a few mph. 10 mph is generally the threshold for kicking off on other brand manual transmissions that I am familiar with - yes, including the Corolla for one, that gets 6 mpg better on the highway (it was 8 when the sube was new) than the sube cvt even though it's rated the same 36 mpg highway. I am sure your 5 speed works the same way, although the threshold for dropping out of cruise control may be different. The cvt slow a lot before dropping out - I don't know what it actually kicks out at yet - it is much lower than 10 mph less. It will hit third at over 5,000 rpm and pull a hill quite well, although it's getting less than 10 mpg when doing so.

When talking economy, it is better to slow a little going up hills than downshift (as in extensively with the Impreza cvt). So, combining the elevation gain with the wind resistance (as in Euler - all Bernoulli did was integrate Euler's equation so I refuse to give him credit) the cvt downshifts earlier with higher speeds which compounds the increase in fuel consumption.

Looking globally at the discussion, I would bet that the 5 speed gets more than 3 mpg less than the cvt, (e.g. cvt reality might be 30 in a certain situation, and the 5 speed might be the same, vs. 36 and 33) and may in fact get better mpg on a real highway, unless going very slow (<60 or 65) and on flatland.

P.S. If I had it to do over again, I would buy the 5 speed, but with what I would lose in $ it's not worth it to trade it in.

P.S. #2: How many other cars get more mpg's with the automatic than the manual?
I could never get over 21-22 mpg in city only driving in the summer much less winter and low 30's highway. 70+ mph is normal in my part of the world. i had a cvt sport with 4100 miles on it. I ended up trading it this weekend. Nice car but IMO needs some refinement, exempt the chassis, which IMO was great. As I have pointed out before my 10 Outback matched or got better MPG than the Impreza in the same driving environment. I would bet a HP jump with better MPG in the next couple of years
pgh88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 12:55 PM   #317
aeoporta
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 334126
Join Date: Oct 2012
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: New York
Vehicle:
2013 5mt Sp Premium
Venetian Red & Dark Gray

Default

new car arrived last week wed in middle of snow storm, since then I drove her 100miles home, took 9w aka mountains, some 87, 208, then drove into nyc. For the rest of the trips I drove stop and go commute into nyc. For my first tank of gas with winter blend oh and snow tires I have the following. snow tires were put on car 1 mile after pickup. temps were 30 or below and fill up was yesterday at 50f.
odometer: 263.1
gallons of gas: 10.778
MPG hand calculated: 24.41
now commute is from northern nj to nyc, everyday so it drives in the city, ALOT
So far so good and not bad for a new engine and etc. To get better fuel economy I sometimes can mimic an auto trans and shift around 2k, unless I am being nutty then I will shift at 3k, by the time I hit 35mph I am prob in 4th gear. I have also driven the cvt impreza (loaner) and coaxed the epa figures out of it. driving style and judging distances with all cars seems to play a very strong role in getting the epa numbers you require. maybe my car is a fluke
aeoporta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 04:16 PM   #318
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aeoporta View Post
new car arrived last week wed in middle of snow storm, since then I drove her 100miles home, took 9w aka mountains, some 87, 208, then drove into nyc. For the rest of the trips I drove stop and go commute into nyc. For my first tank of gas with winter blend oh and snow tires I have the following. snow tires were put on car 1 mile after pickup. temps were 30 or below and fill up was yesterday at 50f.
odometer: 263.1
gallons of gas: 10.778
MPG hand calculated: 24.41
now commute is from northern nj to nyc, everyday so it drives in the city, ALOT
So far so good and not bad for a new engine and etc. To get better fuel economy I sometimes can mimic an auto trans and shift around 2k, unless I am being nutty then I will shift at 3k, by the time I hit 35mph I am prob in 4th gear. I have also driven the cvt impreza (loaner) and coaxed the epa figures out of it. driving style and judging distances with all cars seems to play a very strong role in getting the epa numbers you require. maybe my car is a fluke
did you adjust for the 2.5-3.5% odometer error? (my sport premium comes in at 2.8%)
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 05:12 PM   #319
aeoporta
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 334126
Join Date: Oct 2012
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: New York
Vehicle:
2013 5mt Sp Premium
Venetian Red & Dark Gray

Default

Mileage is from gps track which matches odometer minus 6 miles if I remove that oh no 23.85. I'm in trouble now. Forgot to mention roof rack was also on car. Any other variables I need to adjust ?
aeoporta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 05:57 PM   #320
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aeoporta View Post
Mileage is from gps track which matches odometer minus 6 miles if I remove that oh no 23.85. I'm in trouble now. Forgot to mention roof rack was also on car. Any other variables I need to adjust ?
so gps track was 6 miles more? seems to be about what most people see.
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 06:37 PM   #321
aeoporta
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 334126
Join Date: Oct 2012
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: New York
Vehicle:
2013 5mt Sp Premium
Venetian Red & Dark Gray

Default

considering what the car drove through, plus mountains, plus stop and go plus....my lead foot I say this car performed within my acceptable limits. Looks like subaru did not deceive me
aeoporta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 09:15 PM   #322
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aeoporta View Post
considering what the car drove through, plus mountains, plus stop and go plus....my lead foot I say this car performed within my acceptable limits. Looks like subaru did not deceive me
None of that matters, my 2004 corolla would have got 62mpg under the same conditions












flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 11:15 PM   #323
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 aeoporta View Post
Looks like subaru did not deceive me
Your opinion is typical of 5 speed manual owners.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 11:27 PM   #324
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
I don't think your theory that the 5speed performs relatively better than the CVT is sound.
Then why are the mpg defenders typically 5 speed owners, and the dissatisfied usually cvt owners?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeeper View Post
I don't think Subara geared the CVT to excell at the EPA test but suck in daily driving
I don't either. I don't think they cared about what it did to daily driving. I think the transmission tuner may have just boosted the EPA test numbers, without comprehending what it would do to mpg in reality.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 08:15 AM   #325
Zeeper
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Albany NY
Vehicle:
2012 Sport 5MT
Green/Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
Then why are the mpg defenders typically 5 speed owners, and the dissatisfied usually cvt owners?
Probably because us 5 speed drivers know that how we drive the car has a big effect on mileage, so we don't complain about lower MPG's when we flog it or drive it fast on the highway, and know that to get the EPA numbers we cannot flog it or drive it 70+mph on the highway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
I don't either. I don't think they cared about what it did to daily driving. I think the transmission tuner may have just boosted the EPA test numbers, without comprehending what it would do to mpg in reality.
This statement is strange. If Subaru is only trying to game the EPA, why do all the professional auto mag reviews say it performs well on their test drives?

Maybe they are comparing it to every other mass produced car, by all the other manufacturers, who are all simultaneously trying to game the EPA by producing crappy driving cars.

Even if that were the case, it would be irrelevant, because the car that is produced to be a better daily driver without concern for the EPA apparently does not exist.
Zeeper 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
2012 WRX: driving techniques for fuel economy? exk20z3kid Newbies & FAQs 32 08-30-2012 11:47 AM
2009 Impreza Fuel Economy Jon [in CT] News & Rumors 54 08-22-2008 09:19 PM
Fuel Economy Issues Nitrous Newbies & FAQs 25 12-13-2007 08:56 PM
2008 Impreza & WRX EPA Fuel Economy WraithAkaMrak News & Rumors 12 07-25-2007 01:38 AM
I think my fuel guage is messed up...or fuel economy GooseMan Service & Maintenance 6 05-02-2003 03:52 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.