Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Thursday September 18, 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 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 07-31-2013, 10:18 AM   #651
FunkMasta
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 66985
Join Date: Jul 2004
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Coquitlam, B.C. Canada
Vehicle:
2001 2.5RS sold
2012 2.0 Hatch

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Caocao View Post
Isn't it a 55 litre tank though?
That's why I was so surprised to see the pump go by 55 before stopping. Didn't think I was that close to empty.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
FunkMasta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2013, 06:51 AM   #652
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
Well let's see, there are many members on this very thread, who drive CVT's, and get EPA HWY numbers, who have been telling you as much.

What makes you think your anecdotal reporting is any more valid than theirs? Are you smarter and better looking than they are?
Actually my reporting includes other than individual observations, so it's not anecdotal. Mine have been statistical-accumulations. And , your definition of "many" is wanting. Many posts does not mean many posters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeeper View Post
Anyone who cares can look at the same Fuelly data we are, and will see that Impreza's with the highest combined mpg's are all CVT equipped Impreza's -- not a single 5 speed on the far right of the data set.
I think I have it. Have you been checked for dyslexia?
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2013, 08:41 AM   #653
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
Actually my reporting includes other than individual observations, so it's not anecdotal. Mine have been statistical-accumulations. And , your definition of "many" is wanting. Many posts does not mean many posters.

I think I have it. Have you been checked for dyslexia?
NASIOC Impreza owners that drive the car on the highway at speeds averaging less than 70mph seem to be reporting meeting EPA HWY mpg numbers (or better). This is true whether the car has a 5 speed or a CVT.

Who knew? Convince them that they suck and are wrong, you don't need to convince me.

Your chart? Combined mpg's is no way to argue HWY mpg's. Someone interested in math might have realized that...

As to your last statement? It allows for an extended latin response: Argumentum ad hominem ad nauseum.

LOL

Last edited by Zeeper; 08-13-2013 at 08:48 AM.
Zeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2013, 11:23 AM   #654
G-Omaha
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 209172
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Omaha, NE
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza CLL
BL2

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeeper View Post
Argumentum ad hominem ad nauseum.
Like it. We should change the thread title to this.
G-Omaha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2013, 03:18 PM   #655
lymphomaniac
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 334451
Join Date: Oct 2012
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: YVR
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza2.0i CVT
DGM (sedan)

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkMasta View Post
That's why I was so surprised to see the pump go by 55 before stopping. Didn't think I was that close to empty.
Maybe it's a calibration issue with the pump? That's one possibility... and given the way gasoline is priced here in the Greater Vancouver area, I wouldn't put it past some of those gas stations to not fiddle with the gas meters...
lymphomaniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2013, 03:39 PM   #656
nubsub
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 313575
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza 2.0i HB

Default

i realized i never follow-up on my last bar and warning light. i was on a 90% city tankful i found:

310mi goes from 2 bars to 1 (60mi remaining according to computer)
320mi low fuel warning comes on (50mi remaining)
338mi tanked up (40mi remaining) and pump clicked at 12.8gallons

the computer showed 27.9MPG, but hand calc and accounting for odometer error gave 27.4

what it suggests to me is that the computer is pretty close to right although probably has some margin of safety even if the actual capacity is 14.5gallons
nubsub is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2013, 01:18 AM   #657
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
NASIOC Impreza owners that drive the car on the highway at speeds averaging less than 70mph seem to be reporting meeting EPA HWY mpg numbers (or better). This is true whether the car has a 5 speed or a CVT.
You seem to not know right from left as you keep saying the CVT cars show up on the right side of the graph, proclaiming they get better numbers. Maybe if you study it some more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
Or, look again at the first post in this thread.

Take your pick. But you won't, you will continue to spew BS.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2013, 06:48 AM   #658
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 seem to not know right from left as you keep saying the CVT cars show up on the right side of the graph, proclaiming they get better numbers. Maybe if you study it some more.
You apparently still believe that if you only owned a magical 5 speed you would be seeing higher HWY mpg's than you do with your CVT. I have news for you, bad news -- If I drive my Impreza at speeds averaging 80mph I get crappy mpg's on the highway too! (insert dopeslap)

Your 'evidence' is a chart showing combined mpg's.

Here is an example, from the data that makes up that chart, of why you are completely off base:



Notice how important the CITY/HWY mix is to the resultant COMBINED mpg's? See how when car that is mostly driven in the City might cause your chart to appear a little lopsided when you try to use it to prove HWY mpg's?

Who knew? (that's right, you should have, this was already pointed out to you, but you are so open minded you ignored it, like anything else that does not confirm you are always right, which you are not)

Now go trade in your CVT equipped crapbox, and buy a 5 speed, and drive it to work for a week at your usual 80+mph. Track your mileage, use your scangauge, and then...

come back with pieces of crow in your mouth to apologize for being wrong. I'll wait.

Last edited by Zeeper; 08-17-2013 at 07:04 AM.
Zeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2013, 12:44 PM   #659
dragonbear7
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 365417
Join Date: Aug 2013
Default For what its worth

Greetings, just thought I would share my experiences with my 2013 Premium hatchback CVT, about 6000 miles.

I feel like the car loosened up past 5k miles.

Summer been averaging 30-33 mpg according to the dashboard. I would consider this moderate trying to save gas driving.

One tank I tried my damnedest to get as high a number as I could. Some trips were not conducive but basically did the following:

Try to decelerate coming to a stop. Then I think the biggest trick is to keep the MPG guage needle above the negative. Its not easy, you will go too slow at times! Just try to get out of people's way or accelerate down hill so you can go up the next without too much negative.

Even with all that I just barely got the MPG guage to read 37 mpg. It ain't easy but you can do it. I know I won't be driving like that much anymore.

I also did a long road trip, 4k miles or so, and averaged 33 mpg according to dash with moderately loaded car.
dragonbear7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 11:12 AM   #660
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
You apparently still believe that if you only owned a magical 5 speed you would be seeing higher HWY mpg's than you do with your CVT. I have news for you, bad news -- If I drive my Impreza at speeds averaging 80mph I get crappy mpg's on the highway too! (insert dopeslap)
del bs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeeper View Post
Now go trade in your CVT equipped crapbox, and buy a 5 speed, and drive it to work for a week at your usual 80+mph. Track your mileage, use your scangauge, and then...

come back with pieces of crow in your mouth to apologize for being wrong. I'll wait.
You're going to wait for a long time, because we're in a different world. You like to twist things and look for individual examples to support your argument, which is entirely different from mine, and really has nothing to do with the big picture. I gave you - actually keep giving you - 3 different places to look for differences in mpg - Consumer Reports actual highway testing by professional drivers, mpgomatic by a supposedly professional (at least consistent) driver, and fuelly.com. Your only potential way out is to attack the fuelly.com info "because it's not highway, and we're talking about highway". Well, the other two confirm the highway problem.

So how are you going to twist it now? Pick a different example? I'm working with all the info, and you're just picking and choosing anecdotes that you seem to think we all will agree represent the whole picture and make your case.

You have a few followers here, but despite your attacks on people who actually have CVT transmissions in an effort (that works sometimes) to chase them away, reality shows that you are not only wrong, but willing to forgo your credibility to people who see through your bs - but then you disgust them too so they leave as well.

Like I've said, some get good mpg with the CVT, but by and large they are the ones willing to continue to slow down beyond reason to get it.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 11:33 AM   #661
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
del bs


You're going to wait for a long time, because we're in a different world. You like to twist things and look for individual examples to support your argument, which is entirely different from mine, and really has nothing to do with the big picture. I gave you - actually keep giving you - 3 different places to look for differences in mpg - Consumer Reports actual highway testing by professional drivers, mpgomatic by a supposedly professional (at least consistent) driver, and fuelly.com. Your only potential way out is to attack the fuelly.com info "because it's not highway, and we're talking about highway". Well, the other two confirm the highway problem.

So how are you going to twist it now? Pick a different example? I'm working with all the info, and you're just picking and choosing anecdotes that you seem to think we all will agree represent the whole picture and make your case.

You have a few followers here, but despite your attacks on people who actually have CVT transmissions in an effort (that works sometimes) to chase them away, reality shows that you are not only wrong, but willing to forgo your credibility to people who see through your bs - but then you disgust them too so they leave as well.

Like I've said, some get good mpg with the CVT, but by and large they are the ones willing to continue to slow down beyond reason to get it.
Fuelly is the largest dataset of real world numbers any of us have access to, a much larger sample size than Consumer Reports.

Fuelly provides some useful data, you are just too caught up in the pretty graph to look at the entries that make up those numbers.

The car I referenced gives a perfect example of a CVT Impreza that is achieving the EPA estimated mpg's. It sure looks like it isn't, with an overall combined mpg of only 27mpg.

But if you scratch beneath that number to see it is mostly CITY miles, then it is perfectly within the EPA range (don't believe me, this is a screenshot from the data on fuelly entered by Hemophilic, search this forum and you will see we already discussed it).

As for Consumer Reports, they are a good reference, but won't get you anything in your EPA complaint. When you post the actual response that shows the EPA is agreeing with you and a photo of your compensation check from Subaru, I will eat crow.

You won't promise the opposite, 'cause you secretly already know which one of us is slinging b.s., and for once I agree with you...

Lastly, you reference Mpgomatic? You mean this review?


Ya, a slam dunk for your theory...

"Interstate Mileage Testing:

Cruise control set to 68 MPH, A/C off, windows up: 36.6 MPG
Cruise control set to 68 MPH, A/C on, windows up: 36.9 MPG
Cruise control off, target speed 60-72 MPH, A/C off, windows up: 40.8 MPG
Interstate highway testing temperatures were in the low eighties, with 68 MPH steady state cruising at approximately 2000 RPM."

I guess by "slow down beyond reason", you mean driving less than 80mph

ROFLMAO

Last edited by Zeeper; 08-16-2013 at 11:47 AM.
Zeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 11:40 AM   #662
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
Mpgomatic? You mean this review?

http://youtu.be/cxDrA0WennE

Ya, a slam dunk for your theory...

"Interstate Mileage Testing:

Cruise control set to 68 MPH, A/C off, windows up: 36.6 MPG
Cruise control set to 68 MPH, A/C on, windows up: 36.9 MPG
Cruise control off, target speed 60-72 MPH, A/C off, windows up: 40.8 MPG
Interstate highway testing temperatures were in the low eighties, with 68 MPH steady state cruising at approximately 2000 RPM."

I guess by "slow down beyond reason" you mean driving less than 80mph ROFLMAO
I'm not going to go back and look because you waste too much of my time the way it is. As you should remember, the way we checked mpgomatic was we compared the EPA estimate with the mpgomatic result for several different cars, and the other cars got much better mpgomatic results compared to the EPA estimates than the, again, CVT which you don't even have.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 11:51 AM   #663
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 going to go back and look because you waste too much of my time the way it is.
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. Watching you try to spin the MPG O'matic data, that shows the CVT Impreza they tested delivering better than the EPA HWY estimated mpg's @68mph, so it somehow confirms your pre-existing beliefs?

FAIL, Try again... you are not living up to your Keynes motto...

Oh wait, you just took your toys and left, you don't want to discuss that anymore because it is a waste of your time...

LOL, you are as sensible as a two year old.

Last edited by Zeeper; 08-16-2013 at 01:57 PM.
Zeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 12:56 PM   #664
G2Spfld
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 354284
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:
2013 Imp Sport CVT
SWP

Default

I consistently drive 5-10 over speed limit. I usually use m mode in town to save the cvt searching for a gear, and I drive it harder than most I'd think. Now that I've hit 10K miles it still increases mpg. My 70/30 city driving is now 2 tanks at 30.x mpg. It was 26-27 mpg. I will not "drive it" to save mpg, I do drive it to save mpg. Anything it gets is so much better than what I was used to, however with it increasing like this I have to wonder where it'll end. I'd say you can't complain on mpg till the cars fully broke in, as they seem to improve as miles clock
G2Spfld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 01:03 PM   #665
Matt4949
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 313890
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: CT
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Sport
Marine Blue Pearl

Default

I'm at 29,600 now, and just recently had an ECM reprogram I knew about, and should have had done quite a while ago. Before the reprogram I was averaging 28.5 mpg and in the few days since I've averaged 33.3 mpg with no change in habits. Probably 60/40ish highway/city. CVT. Food for thought.

Finally happy with my fuel economy.

Took this pic last year, so well before the reprogram. Granted, this was only after 1 tank, and all highway driving. But the potential is there!

Last edited by Matt4949; 08-16-2013 at 01:35 PM.
Matt4949 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 01:20 PM   #666
Xafen
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 306398
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Omaha, NE
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Premium
Camellia Red

Default

Of course, I really don't consider 60mph to be unreasonably slow.

I was able to hit 48mpg over 120 miles. It was 50mpg before I had to do some city driving. If I would have just kept going all the way to Colorado that trip, I could have stayed at 48-50mpg.

This was at 60mph though...0 wind, flat interstate. Wind, hills, and speed will very quickly degrade the mpg. My Fuelly is just over 29 mpg now. In town, in the winter, I'm lucky to break 23 mpg.

Overall I'm very happy with the numbers, but it takes considerations to do really well, and it is easy to do really bad.
Xafen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 03:05 PM   #667
G2Spfld
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 354284
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:
2013 Imp Sport CVT
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt4949 View Post
I'm at 29,600 now, and just recently had an ECM reprogram I knew about, and should have had done quite a while ago. Before the reprogram I was averaging 28.5 mpg and in the few days since I've averaged 33.3 mpg with no change in habits. Probably 60/40ish highway/city. CVT. Food for thought.

Finally happy with my fuel economy.

Took this pic last year, so well before the reprogram. Granted, this was only after 1 tank, and all highway driving. But the potential is there!
What year is your car? I'm not familiar with an ECU re flash, although no real reason I would be unless Subaru notified me or this board.
G2Spfld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 03:40 PM   #668
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
I'm not going to go back and look because you waste too much of my time the way it is. As you should remember, the way we checked mpgomatic was we compared the EPA estimate with the mpgomatic result for several different cars, and the other cars got much better mpgomatic results compared to the EPA estimates than the, again, CVT which you don't even have.
but they beat the EPA estimate....i don't see a problem
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 03:49 PM   #669
lymphomaniac
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 334451
Join Date: Oct 2012
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: YVR
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza2.0i CVT
DGM (sedan)

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy1100 View Post
but they beat the EPA estimate....i don't see a problem
A friend of mine used to be a computer tech back in the late-'80s, early '90s. This was in the age before professional trouble-call tracking software; they had to log all issues on a basic database. There was an acronym they used to use for a good number of issues: PEBKAC. It stood for "Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair".


lymphomaniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 03:52 PM   #670
Caocao
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 330507
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Ottawa
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Ltd CVT
White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
del bs


You're going to wait for a long time, because we're in a different world. You like to twist things and look for individual examples to support your argument, which is entirely different from mine, and really has nothing to do with the big picture. I gave you - actually keep giving you - 3 different places to look for differences in mpg - Consumer Reports actual highway testing by professional drivers, mpgomatic by a supposedly professional (at least consistent) driver, and fuelly.com. Your only potential way out is to attack the fuelly.com info "because it's not highway, and we're talking about highway". Well, the other two confirm the highway problem.

So how are you going to twist it now? Pick a different example? I'm working with all the info, and you're just picking and choosing anecdotes that you seem to think we all will agree represent the whole picture and make your case.

You have a few followers here, but despite your attacks on people who actually have CVT transmissions in an effort (that works sometimes) to chase them away, reality shows that you are not only wrong, but willing to forgo your credibility to people who see through your bs - but then you disgust them too so they leave as well.

Like I've said, some get good mpg with the CVT, but by and large they are the ones willing to continue to slow down beyond reason to get it.
I call BS, not our fault if the speed limit in your neck of the woods is much higher then anywhere else in the country. Me, i drive the speed limit or 5 over and meet or surpass the epa on a consistant basis. Some do slow down and achieve 40+ mpg others (like you) consistently drive uphill at 80 mph but i would say the majority of cvt owner get in the mid 30s.
Caocao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 05:15 PM   #671
VegasSubie
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 365638
Join Date: Aug 2013
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza 2.0i
1991 Galant VR4

Default

I've been getting about 35MPG. Air temperatures have been 80 up to 105 and I've been driving with the AC on. Hasn't been driving on flat ground either, quite a few grades as high as 6%. I'm very impressed with the mileage I'm getting from my Impreza with the CVT transmission.
VegasSubie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 05:22 PM   #672
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 Caocao View Post
Some do slow down and achieve 40+ mpg others (like you) consistently drive uphill at 80 mph but i would say the majority of cvt owner get in the mid 30s.
Actually the terrain around here isn't that bad - half the time we're going downhill

The point is not that the EPA estimate is achievable - it is. It's what is required compared to other cars in getting their EPA estimates. Other cars can get it going much faster - read "more efficiently". That is seen on all the comparative testing.

Now back to our regularly scheduled ad hominems:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeeper View Post
LOL, you are as sensible as a two year old.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 05:32 PM   #673
lymphomaniac
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 334451
Join Date: Oct 2012
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: YVR
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza2.0i CVT
DGM (sedan)

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
The point is not that the EPA estimate is achievable - it is.
[/thread]

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
It's what is required compared to other cars in getting their EPA estimates. Other cars can get it going much faster - read "more efficiently".
Then that's not a problem with the car per se, or even their manufacturer. It's a problem with the test parameters. You should be petitioning the EPA to conduct their testing with different parameters, not complaining about how the Impreza is not meeting the values as stated per the EPA's test parameters, because the vehicle generally can meet (and often surpass) the estimates at or near the test parameter values.
lymphomaniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 05:57 PM   #674
G2Spfld
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 354284
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:
2013 Imp Sport CVT
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lymphomaniac View Post



Then that's not a problem with the car per se, or even their manufacturer. It's a problem with the test parameters. You should be petitioning the EPA to conduct their testing with different parameters, not complaining about how the Impreza is not meeting the values as stated per the EPA's test parameters, because the vehicle generally can meet (and often surpass) the estimates at or near the test parameter values.
I agree, but this damn CMAX press release is going to give him some wind under his sails. Difference is that's a completely different category, and for the love of God price point. I looked at the awd cmax and almost as much as a dang BMW
G2Spfld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2013, 06:17 PM   #675
ans2k
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 315631
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Bryant, AR
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Sport

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post

The point is not that the EPA estimate is achievable - it is. :
And I think I have read enough. We're done here.
ans2k 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


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:20 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.