91 octance 300-335miles on tank
- Thread starter Int3grity
- Start date
The EPA figures on my CX-7 are 19 city / 24 highway -- The NEW EPA figures on the CX-7 - brought up from 1970's standards - is 17 city / 23 highway.
I don't drive nice and I get 19 city/hwy mix. My wife drives like a typical woman and gets 22 city/hwy mix. If you're getting less than 17 mpg, then you're stomping on it every chance you get. I'm tired of hearing the oh, my car is a lemon, somethings wrong with it, I only get 12 mpg.
Look, the fact that I can get 19 mixed tells me the car is as advertised and as tested by the EPA fine. You're talking to a guy coming off of a "built" Camaro Z28 and who drives a modified 300ZX on the weekends - two cars you don't feather throttle. If I can get 19, any of you guys can. The only exception would be you guys with AWD - then I say you shouldn't fall below 17.
One last thing. When you buy a car and you look at the EPA ratings on it...do you look further down then the big number? On our CX-7's it states, clear as day on the sticker that came right off of the passenger side window, "actual mileage will vary with options, driving conditions, driving habits and vehicle's condition. Results reported to EPA indicate that the majority of vehicles with these estimates will achieve between 16 and 22 MPG in the city and between 20 and 28 MPG on the highway."
I don't see a single peice of print anywhere on this sticker that says its economical or fuel efficient. I see phrases like responsive, technology advanced drivetrain, sports-car inspired handling and braking, always the soul of a sports car...nothing about fuel efficient. If goes on to brag about how powerful the engine is and how zoom-zoom is the emotion of motion and the car was designed for the feel that driving enthusiets love.
How does that equate to "good fuel economy?" I think for that, you need to look under "Honda CR-V."
I don't drive nice and I get 19 city/hwy mix. My wife drives like a typical woman and gets 22 city/hwy mix. If you're getting less than 17 mpg, then you're stomping on it every chance you get. I'm tired of hearing the oh, my car is a lemon, somethings wrong with it, I only get 12 mpg.
Look, the fact that I can get 19 mixed tells me the car is as advertised and as tested by the EPA fine. You're talking to a guy coming off of a "built" Camaro Z28 and who drives a modified 300ZX on the weekends - two cars you don't feather throttle. If I can get 19, any of you guys can. The only exception would be you guys with AWD - then I say you shouldn't fall below 17.
One last thing. When you buy a car and you look at the EPA ratings on it...do you look further down then the big number? On our CX-7's it states, clear as day on the sticker that came right off of the passenger side window, "actual mileage will vary with options, driving conditions, driving habits and vehicle's condition. Results reported to EPA indicate that the majority of vehicles with these estimates will achieve between 16 and 22 MPG in the city and between 20 and 28 MPG on the highway."
I don't see a single peice of print anywhere on this sticker that says its economical or fuel efficient. I see phrases like responsive, technology advanced drivetrain, sports-car inspired handling and braking, always the soul of a sports car...nothing about fuel efficient. If goes on to brag about how powerful the engine is and how zoom-zoom is the emotion of motion and the car was designed for the feel that driving enthusiets love.
How does that equate to "good fuel economy?" I think for that, you need to look under "Honda CR-V."
Je$us effing chri$t on a popsicle-stick...
Why can't people type like normal, literate, educated adults...?
I am sorry PMena... I don't mean to pick JUST on you, but what is with the abbreviated text trend...? This isn't a cell-phone where you're saving time because one button cycles through 3-or-more characters... it's a normal keyboard.
wat... teh... gud... what, the & good... I'm no "old-fart". I'm not out of touch. I understand how it all got started - but perpetuating it for the sake of it being "cool" just makes those that use it look stupid.
* SIGH *
I am sorry I hijacked the thread - and normally I don't let it get to me. I guess I'm just tired of LOLspeak.
Sorry. We now return you to your regularly-scheduled forum thread already in progress.
-sf
(wedge)
+1.... If I drive it like I stole it I average 17 with a 70/30 hwy/cty mix. The only time it goes lower is in the winter and all cars get worse MPG in cold weather. Plus I have the remote start. But I'm willing to sacrifice MPG for a warm car.
Every city is different as well.
"City driving" is such a broad and vague term. In some cities you can drive a constant speed almost your entire commute and in others you will hit every light or you will get stuck in 2 hour stop and go traffic.
If you live in a big city where you're idling 2 hours in rush hour traffic, please don't expect to beat the EPA or even meet the EPA estimates.
"City driving" is such a broad and vague term. In some cities you can drive a constant speed almost your entire commute and in others you will hit every light or you will get stuck in 2 hour stop and go traffic.
If you live in a big city where you're idling 2 hours in rush hour traffic, please don't expect to beat the EPA or even meet the EPA estimates.
payi attention this vehicle is rated at City 17/hwy 22 (2.3L engine/6-speed auto trans with a Fuel Tank Capacity: 18.2 gallons
now using the MPG calculator over at
http://www.milesgallon.com/?miles=325&gallons=16.189&price=4.139
Gas Mileage Calculator
Distance: 325 miles
Gallons of fuel used: 16.189 gallons (US)
Price per gallon (optional): $4.139/gallon
Your gas mileage is 20.1 miles per US gallon and your fuel cost is $0.21 / mile. (wrc)
Your fuel consumption in some other units
11.7 litres / 100km
4.98 gallons (US) per 100 miles
24.1 miles per imperial gallon (UK/Canada)
1.17 litres per swedish mile (10km)
Driving from New York City to Los Angeles you would have to use about 140 gallons of gas costing you $570.
Now this question goes out to OFFSET how the hell you managed to squeeze in there 362 miles on a single tank and add 18.5 of gas? You did remember to reset the trip computer when you filled up right? Just checking!! cant see this car getting that when no one else has reported anything close to that
now using the MPG calculator over at
http://www.milesgallon.com/?miles=325&gallons=16.189&price=4.139
Gas Mileage Calculator
Distance: 325 miles
Gallons of fuel used: 16.189 gallons (US)
Price per gallon (optional): $4.139/gallon
Your gas mileage is 20.1 miles per US gallon and your fuel cost is $0.21 / mile. (wrc)
Your fuel consumption in some other units
11.7 litres / 100km
4.98 gallons (US) per 100 miles
24.1 miles per imperial gallon (UK/Canada)
1.17 litres per swedish mile (10km)
Driving from New York City to Los Angeles you would have to use about 140 gallons of gas costing you $570.
Now this question goes out to OFFSET how the hell you managed to squeeze in there 362 miles on a single tank and add 18.5 of gas? You did remember to reset the trip computer when you filled up right? Just checking!! cant see this car getting that when no one else has reported anything close to that
No, I reset the trip gauge every single time. However, that was my question in the original thread...why did I fuel up more than what the tank specs are? Is it possible 18.2 gallons in our tanks is just "a figure" and we actually have something more like 19 gallons?
Remember, 362 miles on 18.5 gallons of fuel isn't unreasonable at all. That's only 19.567 miles per gallon. Anyone traveling all highway on one tank, for example, driving cross country, should easily top 400 miles on one tank.
Some things to note - I didn't have any fuel leak out and flow all over the car or on the ground when I filled. So there was no spillage.
Everything I read says "fuel tank size: Approx. 18.2 gallons." -- Approximately
At any rate, I don't really know...go figure.
Last edited:
FYI - I've now found a few sources saying the tank is 18.3 gallons...we're getting closer!!
People who say 18.3:
Motortrend
Internet Auto Guide
Familycar.com
I've also found someone on Edmunds Forums named jbuswell that says they put 18.4 gallons in on thursday of last week. I was not involved in that topic at all.
It all just makes me wonder how approximate, approximately 18.2 gallons is. I don't plan on running my wife's car dry but I'd be curious to know. Someone is bound to run out of gas at some point. Hopefully they'll post up.
People who say 18.3:
Motortrend
Internet Auto Guide
Familycar.com
I've also found someone on Edmunds Forums named jbuswell that says they put 18.4 gallons in on thursday of last week. I was not involved in that topic at all.
It all just makes me wonder how approximate, approximately 18.2 gallons is. I don't plan on running my wife's car dry but I'd be curious to know. Someone is bound to run out of gas at some point. Hopefully they'll post up.
to the gas tank question, typically there is about .5 gallons in the neck (pipe) going down to the tank, so if you top off, you could get up to a half gallon more than the tank holds in there. so, an 18.2 gallon tank holds 18.7 when you factor in the neck.
Similar Threads and Articles
New Threads and Articles
-
-
-
For Sale Got tons of extra parts for mazda protege protege5 engine 2trans- By JP mp5 VA
- Replies: 0