Howdy, Stranger!

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





Howdy, Stranger!

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

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Domestics, Germans Fare Poorly In Latest CU Survey

124

Comments

  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,458
    Cut him some slack Chevy had two and three speed autos then so only one or two gears behind err just like now uhh never mind forget what I said.
  • dave8697dave8697 Posts: 1,498
    I have a 240 HP supercharged 3800 that did 6.5secs 0-60 new with 3650 lb car. It is Rated at EPA identical to the Impala SS (18,27). The Impala can do the 0-60 in 5.3 seconds. That 1.2 seconds drop in 0-60 time is a quantum leap when the start point is 6.5 secs. A DoD benefit of performance with no loss in mpg. The 3800 turned in 31 mpg on the only trip I took it on even though the hwy rating was 27 mpg and it had over 110k miles on it. It gets well over the EPA hwy number with 30% city driving in the mix and it has 162k mi on it. The Impala is also capable of exceeding it's EPA number on the hwy also but maybe not by 15% like the 3800.

    My car was used too, so I paid 25% of orig sticker for 7 yr old car. It wouldn't be fair to put it's 240 HP and 6.5 sec time up against something that cost new what I paid for my used one. It would have to be a motorcycle.

    I do not believe the 8% number without clarification. Is that the 3.9 or the 5.3L? Is that hwy, city, or combined? I will be suprised if that is a 5.3L, hwy mileage percentage, because when I drove one, the instantaneous mileage readout changed by way more than 2 mpg when it turned into a 2650cc 4 cyl. But if you never get out of the city and never hit 50 mph for any of your driving, then DoD won't save you any gas, but neither will 5th or 6th gear of a tranny.
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    DOD is pretty much a crock the way it's currently implemented. An Impala is going to need a certain amount of horsepower (let's call it 40) to cruise at 70 mph, whether it's getting that from eight cylinders or four. If the computer is only running four, the computer would have to input enough fuel to make 10hp per cylinder versus enough fuel to make 5hp per cylinder if all eight were running. DOD only helps on the margins by eliminating the need for a minimal injection on the extra four cylinders, and the computer is very picky about when it will shut off those extra four cylinders. Now, if it had a button on the dash to select 4 or 8-cylinder mode...
  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,458
    You just said a car of the same mass and length with a much longer wheelbase. I know the dimensions of the XJ by heart as it is one of my favorite cars so it was the first one that popped into my head. I am sure I can find some others in the similar size range if I try.

    A XJ actually weighs a little more then an Impala. I think around a 100 lbs or so depending on options. That makes sense though even with the all aluminum alloy chassis the Jag has a lot more features then the Impala including a heavy air suspension. It makes about the same horsepower and torque with 1.1 less liters in the engine.

    If you use the 2008 numbers then the jag is actually one mpg ahead of the Impala.

    link title
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    http://media.gm.com/us/chevrolet/en/product_services/r_cars/07%20chevrolet%20ss%- - - 20oview.html

    Says "up to 8%"

    " Impala SS is powered by the all-new 5.3L small-block V-8 with Active Fuel Management technology, which regulates between eight-cylinder and four-cylinder operation and provides up to 8 percent improved fuel economy in certain light-load driving conditions. The 5.3L small-block V-8 is rated at 303 horsepower (226 kW) and 323 lb.-ft. (438 Nm) of torque"
  • dweezildweezil Posts: 271
    P0923 said: "Huh? If you're buying with zero down and no trade, a $500 a month payment doesn't get you all that much car. That's assuming you stick with the old fashion traditional 36-month loan I find it depressing that the length of new car loans keeps getting stretched longer and longer. Now I believe you can even get a 96-month loan!"

    Ha. I just saw a sign at a specialty car store that offered 144 months. TWELVE bloody years. And you know there's a poseur out there ready and willing to sign on the dotted line.I'm in the wrong business.

    Re: CU stats: even the worst vehicle at 175 problems per 100 cars equals less than TWO problems per car after several years. CU tested a brand new Coronet wagon in 75 or 76 that had over 50 sample defects, some of them so serious that they compromised the very safety of the vehicle.

    "Faring poorly" is indeed relative. But the headline grabs attention and validates what people want to believe.

    A minimum of 100 responses required and a max of 7000 actual ones for a single model spread over a 10 year time span ??? That would give a great statistical sampling to the Camry that was mentioned but the car with 100 responses ??? I would rate that too little to give an accurate reliabilty rating to any car, Camry or Aveo.
  • lemkolemko Philadelphia, PAPosts: 15,306
    Pretty soon we'll be seeing 30-year interest-only ARMs on luxury cars.
  • nwngnwng Posts: 664
    MB should do what bmw is doing right now offer free maintainence for 3 yrs, face the reality and borrow a page from hyundai to extend the warranty period and loaner car for warranty repairs across the board.

    but of course, mb still thinks that every benz owner should be able to afford regular maintainence and the inconvenience of warranty repairs.
  • dweezildweezil Posts: 271
    Funny !!!!

    Will we be seeing calls for taxpayer subsidzed bail outs too ??/ ;)

    I thought seeing 96 month loans in Las Vegas 8 or 9 years ago was bad. But then it was Vegas, not Sherman Oaks. :surprise:
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Are these as efficient in practice as they are in EPA cycles, though?

    I recall a lot of Hemi owners complaining that the cylinders didn't really deactivate all that often, and real world mileage was still mediocre.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    If you are cruising 80 MPH on level ground, the hemi will not shift into 4 cylinder mode. Below 80, it will, but probably you will need to cruise at 70 or less to really get much deactivation.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,458
    Well then on certain highways out west you will never used the DOD system.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    It all depends on how you drive. If you think that you have to speed along at 10 MPH over the posted speed limit, then your going to burn a lot of fuel. I fine that cruising at 70 MPH is fast enough to get 600 to 700 miles in a nice days driving. I can relax knowing that I will not be getting a speeding ticket any minute and the speeders whiz by in clumps every so often, but generally I am not in a clump of vehicles racing along. So at the end of the day, I am not worn out from all the stress.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,458
    In some of the western states if you aren't doing 80 then you aren't going to be able to keep up with traffic.

    Their speed limits are 75 mph anyway.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    Surly you jest. The only thing you can find in Wyoming are cows, and not many of them. There is no traffic. Montana used to have no speed limit, but now they are 75. Even if you're cruising 80, some will pass you. At 70, I find that I am passing some (like trucks) while others pass me.

    The worst highway that I have been on for traffic was between Kansas City and St. Louis. The speed limit was not 75.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    MD has dense traffic so you don't see 80 very often. Then again, there is enough traffic that you can't use cruise control very often, either.

    I'm sure DoD would turn on and off frequently around here.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,458
    I was thinking more of Arizona and New Mexico.
  • p0926p0926 Posts: 4,423
    You guys don't know what real traffic is! Try driving on an 8-lane divided highway which has a 55 mph speed limit yet the slowest right-hand lane is doing 60-65 and the fastest left-hand lane is doing 75-80+ and all this in bumper-to-bumper traffic :surprise:

    -Frank
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I got a sample of AZ's flat highways recently. Drove from Phoenix to Tucson on an arrow-straight highway, flat as a pancake, too.

    Speed limit was 65 IIRC but people would do 80 even with police on the shoulder. :surprise:
  • colloquorcolloquor Posts: 482
    Sounds like the Dan Ryan, Tri-State, or any freeway/tollway in and around the Chicago area!
  • dave8697dave8697 Posts: 1,498
    So I'm cruising along in DoD getting a 30 mpg readout from the driver info computer and I push ever so slightly on the throttle of an Impala and the car drops back to V8 configuration and my instantaneous mileage drops by 8% down to 27.7 mpg. 27.7 mpg be 'fair' for a 303 HP V8 from the GM guys who have no worthy innovations. I guess the Asian 303 HP V8's get 35-40 mpg because they are full of efficiency and other innovations of which American cars are starved of. 35-40 ss hwy mpg is available in what Asian V8 fullsize passenger car? Or is the 8% number GM media puts out set to avoid frivolous lawsuits? We are talking about a 35-40 mpg car geared for 5.3 second 0-60 times also.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    Do you actually have an Impala with the 5.3 engine? If so what kind of fuel consumption are you getting? My SRX can get 30 MPG's on level ground too, but this is usually momentary...

    On the government fuel economy website, one owner of an Impala with the 5.3 engine reports highway mileage of 20.5 MPG. Another reports 19.5, but some trips are more (23). Owners with V6s are getting around 25 MPG.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    I drove thru Chicago recently. Yes some people were speeding, but I found that the traffic was moving at about 60 MPH, not 80 MPH. I tried to stay out of the way of the speeders. I doubt that the speeders were really getting whereever they were going that much faster.

    My experience is that speeding along at 90 MPH does not really save that much time by the end of the day. This is because you will end up clogged in slower traffic a lot of the time. In Wyoming traffic clogs are less frequent, but most highways are two lane, so you will get behind a truck before long...
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    So I'm cruising along in DoD getting a 30 mpg readout from the driver info computer

    According to the computer I got 69 mpg in a '98 Deville about ten minutes ago, so I think the computer is full of bantha poodoo.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    I can get an instant reading of 70 MPG going down hill. Even better though, driving my 98 Aurora into Death Valley from the west, the range for what was left in the fuel tank went up to 999 miles. The fuel tank only held 18 gallons full....
  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,458
    What Impala does 0-60 in 5.3 seconds?

    The best time I can find is around 6.12 seconds.

    link title

    I just think you have a tendency to over exaggerate your numbers.
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    Maybe he meant 0-60 yardsfeet?
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    Car & Driver got 5.6 in their June 2006 test. They also averaged 16 MPG.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,458
    Yikes I hate to think how much they power braked the tranny to get that time.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    OK, but 16 mpg is 16 mpg. That's lousy, period.

    People often brag about their record numbers, I'm sure you see 30mpg in the computer readout, but what do you get on a full tank? On average?

    C&D got 16mpg.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    as I reported above, on the fuel economy site, owners of the Impala SS have reported around 20 MPG, with one reporting 23 MPG on the highway.

    Cobalt owners are reporting up to 36 MPG.
    Prius owners all report less than 50 MPG.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Sounds more like it.

    My van was getting 31.3 mpg at one point on a trip, but for full tankfulls my average is more like 23-27mpg.

    I refuse to believe you could get 30+ with an Impala V8 unless you were driving downhill from Pikes Peak. :D
  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,458
    I could stretch my MINI Cooper S up above 50 mpg for a few minutes but I couldn't maintain it.

    I averaged between 35 and 40 mpg with that car on long trips depending on the time of year and if I was in the mountains or not.

    I got between 25 and 27 in the city if I drove normally and a little less if I really hammered it.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    One nice thing about a big engine is that it can be geared tall for the highway. I'm sure that's how my 3.5l van can get 31.3mpg over a 120 mile drive, with lots of weight and the A/C on the whole time.

    Still, city mileage takes a nose dive. You have to start and stop all that weight, and can't really take advantage of the gearing until you cruise on the highway (not too slow, not too fast).

    Hit the sweet spot, in my case 46-60 mph or so, and mileage is phenomenal. But I'll admit you have to try to stay within that range and really make wise lane choices to keep above 30mpg. It's hard work! :shades:
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Posts: 4,277
    My S2000 can get 31mpg if I drive it like a Civic, but if I drive it closer to intended, I get about 25mpg. However, that's still keeping out of the red zone most of the time.

    I've read guys who track their cars, keeping it in VTEC mode the whole time will get about 12mpg :surprise:

    My little AWD Impreza manual gets 31mpg at the moment, and that's cruising at 75-80 on the highways.
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    I burned through a quarter tank of gas doing 1/4 mile runs in the SE-R one night: about 3 gallons in 4 miles.
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Posts: 4,277
    Wow, was that a stocker?
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    Yep. Cars get really bad mileage when you hang the throttle body wide open.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    I have heard from others on other forums that winding the northstar up under full throttle is good for it. So I do that some, but I have not noticed excessive fuel consumption while doing it. I am sure that it probably is getting around 1 MPG while doing this (will have to watch next time), but even so...
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    A Northstar can't wind up as much as an SR20, and it probably depends on how the fuel maps and transmission shift points (on an automatic) are set up for the respective cars. I would assume a Cadillac is set up to make high rpms difficult to maintain.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    In second gear the engine will spin up to 6000 RPMs quite easily, which is about 70 MPH. Since the speed limit is 60, I take my foot of the gas at that point. Climbing a hill with the engine running about 2500 RPMs results in the instant MPG showing about 10 MPG. The transmission will stay in lower gears in manual mode until you shift it. With 315 lb-ft of torque, I do not give it full throttle unless there is plenty of room in front of me.

    http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/2007/HPT%20Library/Premium- %20V/2007_46L_LH2_SRX.pdf
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    In second gear the engine will spin up to 6000 RPMs quite easily

    I was thinking it redlined at 5000 rpm. Maybe that was the older ones?

    If you could find the space to floor it and keep it planted for several minutes and keep the tranny from upshifting early, I bet you could blow through a few gallons, too.
  • dave8697dave8697 Posts: 1,498
    The '07 Impala SS EPA sticker says 27 hwy. I have NEVER had a 6 or 8 cyl GM car or truck that couldn't beat the hwy sticker. NEVER!!!!! In 2007 GM can't make an accurate instantaneous fuel consumption gage but they have DOD, Mass air flow sensors, XM radio and air bags? Mileage can't go up to 35 or 40 or more when coasting down a hill in highest gear with foot off accelerator? If that is what you believe then you have little knowledge of physics. Search a little more and you will find SS owners who top 27 mpg on trips. The average owner of my 3.8 L powered car gets 19 but my last 3 tanks were 27, 27, and 28. What the car magazine gets is racing mileage. My '99 Sonoma 4300V6 ext cab that I bought if S. Fla in May this year got an average of 25.5 in the 6 tanks of gas driving back to Indiana, but it is rated at 21 hwy. When I bought a new '88 Formula 350 and took it to Orlando I got 20-21 mpg on the trip. Car and driver got 12 mpg when they tested the car. So what? 20% of the cars in my work parking lot have severely underinflated tires. Should their mileage numbers count?
  • dave8697dave8697 Posts: 1,498
    That can be seen at NHRA nationals tomorrow in Indy. They consume the same amount of fuel per second as an engine in an SR-71 spyplane with twin 38,000 lb thrust P&W J58's, flying at Mach 3 with full afterburner. J-58's running at full afterburner can be heard from 17 miles away on a ground test stand.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    You have answered my question. You do not have an Impala with the DOD engine, and therefor cannot make serious claims about actual fuel consumption. This is what actual owners of Impala's are getting (some with the V8):
    http://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=browseList2&make=Chevrolet&model=Im- pala
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    The first northstar had a peak horsepower at 6000 RPMs, so the redline should not have been less than 6000. My SRX's peak is at 6400, and I think red line is somewhat higher than that.

    But I really do not want to run it wide open for several minutes. I assume that to use 3 gallons in 4 miles you made 16 quarter mile runs? :D
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    What the car magazine gets is racing mileage

    Not quite, but I understand your point.

    Still, this is the same for every brand of car, and the imports tend to do best in any given class.

    Overall: Prius, VW TDI
    Compact gas non-hybrid: Corolla, Civic, etc.
    Mid-size: Accord, Altima, Camry
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    But I really do not want to run it wide open for several minutes. I assume that to use 3 gallons in 4 miles you made 16 quarter mile runs?

    A quarter mile at WOT, a quarter mile back at 20 mph, and an eighth circling around the parking lot and the staging lanes x 7 times.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Lots of idling and probably a few smoky burnouts, too.

    You'll spend a small fortune on racing fuel, but if you're going to the track that's probably not in your top 10 list of concerns.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,458
    An old coworker of mine had a series of hot Camaros, Novas and Chevelles. I think his fastest car could dip into the 9 second range.

    One run in that Camaro just about emptied the fuel cell. I don't remember how big the fuel cell was though.
This discussion has been closed.