|
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
11-17-2012, 07:10 AM | #251 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region:
NESIC
Location: Upstate NY
Vehicle:2017 Legacy Limited White |
Quote:
Keep on complaining....
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
|
|
11-17-2012, 07:14 AM | #252 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
|
11-17-2012, 07:28 AM | #253 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region:
NESIC
Location: Upstate NY
Vehicle:2017 Legacy Limited White |
Quote:
But to comport to reality, the reality that your HWY MPG number is made up of, you can change your speed regularly, as long as you do not exceed 60mph and average 48mph. Have fun with that! |
|
11-17-2012, 07:43 AM | #254 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
Quote:
|
|
11-19-2012, 01:31 AM | #255 |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 331089
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region:
Tri-State
Location: Bellmore NY
Vehicle:2012 Impreza Base DGM/Dark Grey Metallic |
You're lucky to get even 31.9MPG at 75. My car averages around 28.9 on the highway. And around the city...don't even.
http://www.fuelly.com/driver/danstheman7/impreza Around the city my car does terribly. Now... I didn't buy the car because of MPG, so i'm not going to complain too much. Just trying to give another MPG example for you guys. Wish I could get 33 though. I'd be more than satisfied with a number like that, even if I had to go a little slower than my average 75. |
11-19-2012, 07:41 AM | #256 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
Quote:
If your time is worth 7 or 8 doillars per hour it might be worth it to slow down, but I would have to slow down to 60 or so to get the highway 36 mpg - unlike my Corolla which is also rated at 36 highway, and gets 40 mpg at 75. Not really "comparable". Yours will get better though - a little. |
|
11-19-2012, 09:50 AM | #257 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 89967
Join Date: Jun 2005
Chapter/Region:
NESIC
Location: MA
Vehicle:2020 Volvo S60 Gray |
Quote:
|
|
11-19-2012, 08:20 PM | #258 | |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 310024
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Rocklin, California
Vehicle:2012 Impreza Sport Marine Blue Pearl |
Quote:
|
|
11-19-2012, 09:14 PM | #259 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
Quote:
Of course, there's nothing else to do on that drive... |
|
11-19-2012, 10:36 PM | #260 |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:2012 2.0i Sport 5MT DGM |
|
11-19-2012, 11:05 PM | #261 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
|
11-27-2012, 12:18 PM | #262 | |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:2012 2.0i Sport 5MT DGM |
no, not really. you can achieve the rated MPG if you slow down to a number faster than what the EPA recommends for best MPG (they still recommend 55-60mph), according to your magical scanguage (never have read about you calculating your MPG with actual numbers and odometer error) you can achieve 36mpg at 65mph.
i could provide links, but honestly there is no point. forbes published an article on 11/06/12 that essentially states the testing is flawed and ultimately it comes down to the individual as "your mileage may vary". these are AWD vehicles, they are heavier, they are not that aerodynamic, but according to you that shouldn't matter because in your world physics don't exist, but that is what the article is getting at, there are way too many factors to take the BIG BOLD number as a GUARANTEE, it is not and never will be. ok, 1 link, http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/guides/feg2012.pdf right on page 1 it goes into explaining everything i just stated, and it continues into page 2...... Quote:
|
|
11-27-2012, 02:47 PM | #263 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 89967
Join Date: Jun 2005
Chapter/Region:
NESIC
Location: MA
Vehicle:2020 Volvo S60 Gray |
|
11-27-2012, 02:48 PM | #264 |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:2012 2.0i Sport 5MT DGM |
|
11-27-2012, 08:26 PM | #265 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
Quote:
e.g. the Chevy Equinox, Auto, 2.4 liter. AWD:20/29/23 2WD:22/32/26. Finally, you misread what you quoted. "EPA ratings are a useful tool for comparing vehicles when car buying" If that was true, Consumer Reports would not show that cars getting equivalent real world mpg are basically clumped into two groups: The Impreza which gets less than the EPA rated highway mpg for its independent test, and the rest that get more. |
|
11-27-2012, 10:14 PM | #266 | ||
Scooby Guru
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:2012 2.0i Sport 5MT DGM |
Quote:
here let me misquote the most important part for you Quote:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/drivehabits.shtml or maybe this one for testing http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml it says they use exhaust emissions to actually measure fuel usage, so on a low emission vehicle the testing will be further flawed than it is. but still you can achieve 36mpg in your car if you slow down, so you have no case either in court or for warranty purposes. |
||
11-27-2012, 11:45 PM | #267 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
Quote:
Of course I can achieve 36 mpg. That, again, is where you have lost touch with reality. I can get 45 or 50 mpg if I go slow enough. However, to go slow enough to get 36 mpg on a real road would be hazardous to myself and others - and you keep conveniently ignoring the fact that the cars you yourself mentioned get significantly better mpg at the same EPA rating. "Comparison" remember? It doesn't *compare*. |
|
11-27-2012, 11:59 PM | #268 | |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:2012 2.0i Sport 5MT DGM |
Quote:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/why_differ.shtml |
|
11-28-2012, 12:10 AM | #269 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
Quote:
|
|
11-28-2012, 07:19 AM | #270 | ||
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region:
NESIC
Location: Upstate NY
Vehicle:2017 Legacy Limited White |
Quote:
Quote:
I trust you that in Texas the speed limit in some places is now 85mph. That is not representative of the rest of the country. Even with the higher speed roads that exist, I'd bet the average speed limit across the highways of the United States is not higher than 60mph. You claim to be the math guy, so look it up. I'm guessing what SOA's response will be when they hear from you about how when you drive an average speed of over 70mph, and get lousy HWY mileage, that it reflects some sort of misrepresentation on their part. Please remember to tell them about how your personal scangauge shows 36mpg at 65mph, representing real proof of their faking the EPA testing data. My guess is they will contribute to the Texas Secession Fund, after they finish shaking their heads and laughing at you. Last edited by Zeeper; 11-28-2012 at 07:39 AM. |
||
11-28-2012, 08:46 AM | #271 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
You continue to attack your own straw man.
I guess you will never know the difference between what a particular individual driver gets (which is not at all what I'm talking about) and the difference in mpg between the EPA rating and an independent analysis like Consumer Reports. Most drivers with cvt's see that the mpg when compared to the EPA rating vs. the same info on other cars is horrendous and intuitively know the 2.0 cvt is an outlier, as I've shown a couple of times. Your continued attempt to bring up anecdotal information when you don't even *have* a cvt is ludicrous. So why are you even *in* this conversation when you obviously can't possibly know anything about it? You have a 5 speed. Go talk about 5 speeds. You continue to wallow in and attempt to spread your own ignorance. |
11-28-2012, 09:05 AM | #272 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region:
NESIC
Location: Upstate NY
Vehicle:2017 Legacy Limited White |
Yup, I love to wallow.
When did you get access to all the Consumer Reports test data? All you've seen is their end numbers. You will need more than that to establish some sort of compensation from Subaru. Do you think Consumer Reports will jump on your bandwagon? They haven't complained at all about the MPG's, in fact they stated they were impressed with the MPG's returned with this AWD car. Ouch. |
11-28-2012, 12:25 PM | #273 | |||
Scooby Guru
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:2012 2.0i Sport 5MT DGM |
Quote:
Quote:
and here is the numbers off fuelly, their averages beat even consumer reports testing. but that won't matter to you because it does not support your conspiracy theories http://www.fuelly.com/car/subaru/impreza/2012/hatchback and here is consumer reports mpg complaints about the impreza Quote:
Last edited by flyboy1100; 11-28-2012 at 12:33 PM. |
|||
11-28-2012, 02:49 PM | #274 |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 218050
Join Date: Jul 2009
Chapter/Region:
MWSOC
Location: Columbus ohio
Vehicle:2009 Wrx sedan White |
I thought the new imprezas were on demand awd, meaning they run in 2wd mode until slip is detected. The article i read stated subaru did this to improve fuel economy.
|
11-28-2012, 03:03 PM | #275 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region:
NESIC
Location: Upstate NY
Vehicle:2017 Legacy Limited White |
Quote:
The CVT is like most other Subaru automatics, with electronically controlled clutches to direct power. Estimates vary from 90/10 to 60/40 front to rear power distribution in normal conditions. My hunch is 90% front, because the system works so well there is no need to always send power to the rear wheels in non-slippery conditions, and obviously their goal with the new impreza was to maximize the MPG's, which is why in Texas you can see 36mpg at 65mph on the highway. Impressive! Last edited by Zeeper; 11-28-2012 at 03:52 PM. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
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 |