View Single Post
Old 03-19-2013, 04:02 PM   #4033
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 302491
Join Date: Nov 2011
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Buffalo, NY
2012 Impreza 2.0i Pr
Dark Grey Metallic CVT


Originally Posted by hemophilic View Post

This is precisely the logical failure. Take all of those cars with equivalent numbers and run them through the EPA test and they'll probably come out about the same. I'm sure you'd see a greater disparity if the EPA tests were closer to "normal" driving styles. The details on the EPA tests are just silly.
Look at the "Detailed Comparison" tab on this page:
What has been established here ad nauseum is that the Impreza differs greatly from other cars OUTSIDE of that test.
The logical failure here is that if you stray away from the EPA standards on most other cars the hit on MPG is not nearly as significant as it is for some of us. If we stray from the EPA standard it's a huge drop in fuel economy compared to EPA ratings. If you stray from the standard in the same exact manner in most other cars (not ALL FWD btw) you still get pretty close to EPA ratings.

Saying WHY ad naseum we get lower numbers does not explain WHY THIS PARTICULAR CAR suffers more when straying than others. & it's not ONLY an AWD vs FWD concept here. I myself stray from these standards & know why I get lower numbers. But I've strayed far more in my younger, faster days in many other cars (other AWD & another Subaru CVT recently too) & have still come very close to the EPA ratings. Even taking the old testing methods into consideration back then which would rate slightly higher I was able to come close, meet & exceed the ratings. But on this car.... not gonna happen. & I'm okay with that for the most part. But.....

That's the illogical part & why people are upset. That's what a handful of folks here seem to be missing the point on.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
SleepNMnky is offline   Reply With Quote