Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Midsize Sedans 2.0

18788798818838841028

Comments

  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,046
    LOL. My parents had one with an automatic and dealer installed A/C.

    They also said that going uphill was, umm, stressful. I am curious about what year it was, but I want to say mid to late 60's.
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,046
    Oh cool. Do you know the specs on the new 1.8T yet? Curious. The diesel Mazda6 is highly anticipated. There is also a diesel Optima too, dressed in SX trim. Unfortunately its not available in the US. It has 134 hp and 244 lb ft.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,623
    It's actually a TSI... here's some specs, which are unofficial of course until the 1.8 TSI goes on sale in the USA...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Passat_NMS#Engines
  • m6userm6user Posts: 2,897
    Here's an excerpt from a recent post on Autoblog.com.

    "Mazda has a long motorsports history, and one that is peppered with fascinating cars. The latest chapter in Mazda's racing story has just been written, as Joel Miller and Andrew Carbonell have driven the Visit Florida Racing Mazda6 Skyactiv-D to the car's first ever victory at the Rolex Grand-Am GX race at Road Atlanta. The win marks the first ever for Mazda's diesel-burning, production-car based Skyactiv-D racer, and the first win for a diesel-powered car in a Grand-Am event.

    In fact, it was a particularly good day for the Mazda Motorsports team, as a Mazda6 also picked up the third finishing spot at Road Atlanta. Director of Mazda Motorsports, John M. Doonan, said of the racecar, "We've always said that the best street cars make the best racecars, and, with more than half of the components in the race engine being shared with the street engine, this program is a solid proof-point."
  • suydamsuydam Posts: 881
    Long as you don't mind no safety features whatsoever, and are driving on completely flat roads. :)
  • benjaminhbenjaminh Posts: 1,621
    edited April 2013
    (Quote) "Filled up the Fusion for the 3rd time. Mpg has been 25, 26, 27"

    That's a shame, what motor do you have in your Fusion? What is the EPA rating? My Mazda 6 has been getting 32-34 with mixed driving and has only 800 miles on it.

    My 2013 Accord CVT has been going up in mpg, perhaps as the engine and transmission are broken in. We drive about 60% city and c. 40% short hwy.

    1st tank 27 mpg
    2nd tank 29 mpg
    3rd tank (so far) 30 mpg

    The Mazda SkyActiv is outstanding for mpg, and may perhaps be tops right now. Hard to say.
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,046
    edited April 2013
    Many of you know that Hyundai/Kia fudged their MPG figures on a LOT of models.

    I went to lunch today with a friend that has a 2011 Hyundai Elantra Limited, and he received a check for $150 from Hyundai/Kia yesterday. He seemed to think he was going to keep getting one every year. His friend has a Sonata GLS (2.4) and complained about sub 24 mpg results.

    My Optima rarely (pretty much never) gets over 25. Even when I reset the MPG computer, just as I am entering the highway, it barely tops 26. This is on a car that is rated 24/35 by the EPA, with an average rating of 28? Most of the time my actual MPG is more like 21.6

    Here is an official guide: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2012_Kia_Optima.shtml

    The only model of Optima/Sonata that were "overstated" were the Hybrid models.

    I don't understand how they are getting away the 2.4 model's, as I have not been able to get anywhere near the stated MPG on the label, and neither have a lot of members on http://www.optimaforums.com/forum/ . You guys know I love my car, but the stated MPG figures that are on the EPA sticker are overstated. I cannot replicate them even when I coast down hills and drive 5 mph below limits with all electronics off on the highway. Where is MY check KIA?
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,623
    The fastest I have ever driven is 125, in a Caddy STS w/ the Northstar 300 hp engine.

    Next fastest was in my red, '87 Chevy Z24. 115 mph with the 5 speed. It was goverened due to tire rating. It had 225/60/R-14 BFG's. Can you believe it had 14's as the "performance"tires? Lol.


    Maybe try slowing down? ;)

    Just took my wife's 2013 Sonata on its first long trip, i.e. over ~10 miles. 180 miles, mostly highway, a little in-town. Got 36.5 mpg overall, and 38.5 mpg on the trip to my destination (that was under near-ideal weather conditions, albeit a little cool, mid-30s). Driving all short trips around town for the last five months, I've had no trouble getting mid-20s even in winter in MN. My wife doesn't do quite as well, but she never has on any car--she has a Lead Foot.

    I have no doubt the Sonata (and Optima, same powertrain) 2.4L can meet or exceed its EPA ratings when driven moderately. The problem is, a lot of folks don't drive that way (e.g. all the people who passed me as I was on my trip this weekend, driving at or a bit above the 65 mph speed limit), or don't have driving patterns that are anywhere close to how the EPA tests cars.
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,046
    edited April 2013
    I will concede that this area is very congested, but I did say that I was not able to get close to EPA numbers while purposely driving 5 mph below the limit, with all electronics and HVAC off, and reset the MPG computer on the ramp to the highway. I personally know people with the SAME car, in the same area, who drive "moderately" who also cannot replicate the EPA figures.

    Perhaps it is due to the area being hilly? I don't know, but the last thing you said was "or don't have driving patterns that are anywhere close to how the EPA test cars".

    There is truth in that statement. Perhaps the EPA needs to adjust their testing procedures to more accurately represent...wait for it.....reality!!! :shades:
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,623
    My trip this weekend had a lot of hills. MPG suffered as I went up the hills, but the downgrades made up for it.

    My wife drives like a granny... but a granny with a lead foot. She doesn't do the little but important things to maximize fuel economy.

    It's possible to meet or exceed EPA ratings... I didn't say it was EASY. :)

    Edmunds.com (I think, could have been another automotive publication) published a story recently on how EPA testing doesn't mirror reality for most people. Of course, it's easier to blame the auto manufacturer when a car doesn't achieve its EPA ratings. Harder to sue the Federal government! ;)
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,406
    The EPA has adjusted their numbers downwards twice. Once in the 80's and once a few years ago. The unadjusted numbers are a challenge to obtain (you need to drive real slow - average speed on test is 48 mph), but the adjusted ones should be a piece of cake.

    Here are a few unadjusted numbers - all highway.
    Accord I4 CVT 51 mpg.
    Sonata I4 auto 49 mpg
    Altima I4 CVT 56.1

    BTW when the government says that EPA standards are being raised to 50 mpg by year 20xx, they are talking about the unadjusted numbers.

    Link below has all the numbers - download the excel data files.

    http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/download.shtml
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,046
    edited April 2013
    --Then why don't car makers make the ECO or ECON button light up when you are meeting or exceeding the EPA's parameters to obtain the mileage the car is rated for?
    I know that is a mouthful, but for instance my mom's 2010 Forte' has an ECO button that lights up when driving 'economically". Does it mean it is EPA economical? It lights up fairly easily, and my mother IS a granny (74), and I assure you she is trying her best to get the best MPG, but she can't get there either.
    I just went out to my car and found that my average speed is 29 mph since I filled her up on Friday.I have been driving in mixed city/highway, so it should be getting between 24 and 28, but my car insists that it is getting 21.8.

    Well, whatever the case may be I still love the car and that makes up for it quite a bit.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,623
    Your car has an instantaneous mpg meter that you can use to determine if you're meeting or exceeding the EPA rating, right? My wife's Sonata does.

    I have been driving in mixed city/highway, so it should be getting between 24 and 28, but my car insists that it is getting 21.8.

    You admit you drive in "congested" conditions. I've found FE sucks in such conditions. I only get the good FE I do because I usually don't have to drive on congested roads. I avoid them like the plague whenever possible. One thing the EPA tests are poor at is allowing for a lot of stops/starts, as you will get on congested roads. They also don't allow enough time for stoplights.
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,046
    edited April 2013
    It's the reality thing that is bugging me. Their ratings seem to be based on a commute in magic land where upon leaving my driveway there is a flat level road that is completely straight past fields of flowers and fairies with no stoplights, other cars, and god forbid a gentle rise. After 20 miles at exactly 50 mph at 2000 ft above sea level with an ambient temperature of 67 degrees I park directly in front of my cube farm and am deposited at my desk.
    Please EPA tell me where I can get the 35 mpg I was promised? No? Well, I would sue but because I don't have a flat level commute at 50 mph, 2000 ft above sea level at 65 degrees ambient temperature then the auto makers and the government are not liable. Because the reality is that even in EPA magic land the government is still 16 Trillion in debt and "good luck with that lawsuit dude".
    ARRRRRRGHHHHHHHHH!!!!! :cry:
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 9,446
    I look at it this way, I had an AWD Fusion that average just over 22 mpg for the time I had it, so I'm really happy with the mileage the new Fusion is getting.
    It's a 2.0 ecoboost and the combined rating is 26 mpg.
    I think I've driven it over 20 miles one way once.
    If I go by myself this weekend, I'll probably take the Fiesta, otherwise the Fusion.
    Last year I took half the trip in the Fiesta, 40 mpg on the way out and 44 mpg on the return.
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,046
    edited April 2013
    "I think I've driven it over 20 miles one way once. "

    Was it on magic road? Did you see a red Optima at the end? LMAOOOOOO

    Just kidding. Take the Fusion. The Fiesta is more of a city car with a shorter wheelbase so the ride will not be as comfortable or as quiet.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,623
    Please EPA tell me where I can get the 35 mpg I was promised?

    I know one place you can get it: Minneapolis to Rochester, MN on US-52. Set the cruise to 65-66 (limit is 65) and unless it's really cold or you have a very strong headwind, you'll get your 35 mpg, likely better than that. I did. :)
  • Kirstie@EdmundsKirstie@Edmunds Posts: 10,676
    Please take a few minutes to answer our survey:
    https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/EdmundsForums

    It's really important for us to hear from our regulars to get direction going forward. Only good things are planned for the future, but we need to gather insights to get there!

    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 9,446
    We took the Fiesta to Manhattan last Sunday. Easy to park, but I thought a couple of the potholes were going to eat it. ;)
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,419
    I have seen the Passat styling compared to the Impala several times. Yes, the resemblance is there. However, comparing the Passat to the Impala is like comparing the Audi A6 to the Ford Five Hundred/Taurus. The resemblance is there, but the Germans have a way of putting a bit more taste and stateliness in a conservative but tasteful design. The Passat always looks expensive on the street, whereas the Impala with similar side view looks rental. The Passat design will still look good in 12 years, as 12 year old A6s do. The Five Hundred just looks dowdy. The Camry will not look good in 12 years. The Fusion may not either, although it looks rather snazzy now.

    As for reliability, VW has stepped up to the plate lately. For years, their TDI models have been more reliable than their gassers. If you want a Passat but are hesitant, get a TDI.
Sign In or Register to comment.