+ Efficient for Size
+ Good Torque Response
+ Improved Exterior Styling

- Bargain-Basement Interior and Defects
- Expected Reliability
- Sponge-Tastic Tires

Introduction: I’ll admit it.  I have mixed feelings for Mitsubishi.  I once owned a 2003.5 Lancer Evolution VIII that was a blast to drive, yet was plagued with factory defects.  Most owners of that conveyance have since traded it for a Subaru Impreza STI, or something else, before it catastrophically failed.

The Galant was the only 4-cylinder offering in which to choose from the lineup in Rental Row.  Among with the Impalas, SUVs, and Chrysler 300’s, the Galant offered the most promise in it’s small 2.4L “World” engine (that’s the same one shared with many Chrysler-based vehicles — such as the Sebring, Avenger, and high-trimmed Caliber.  The FE may just save this vehicle’s shortcomings.

On the Outside: The front-end harkens images of the ill-fated Diamante, with the rear ¾ view taking after the youthful Lancer.  I would classify it “awkwardly average” with an air of some class.

Mitsubishi has had its fair share of trouble lately.  Before the Chrysler buy-out from Cerberus, Mitsubishi was left wondering were to go and was struggling to gain a foot-hold on the U.S. market while still sharing engines.  The Eclipse bloated-up, the Galant itself was slipping in simplicity, and the brand was viewed as a risk to buy.  Now, the Chrysler brand has broken free any new design sharing, but retains the venerable 2.4L, DOHC, 4-cylinder that powers much of its lineup.  The question: has Mitz redeemed itself lately?

On the Inside: Ugh.  The interior is cut-and-pasted from the Endeavor SUV, which is at best, mediocre (or vice-versa).  The biggest complaint is the driver’s seat comfort.  Height adjustment is available in this trim via knob, but lumbar is fixed in the Hunchback Position.  The wheel/column only tilts and doesn’t telescope.  Even the Chevy Cobalt offers a telescoping wheel.  Not good.  The HVAC and radio controls are cheaply lit, and hard to see in bright light.  Is the A/C on or not?

Reporting in all fairness, blind-spots were abundant and sound system was utterly awful.  The bass boost was in full-force.  A full adjustment to “-6” on that setting still announced the authority of the thump.  Conclusion: it’s uncomfortable in there.

Otherwise, expect faux-wood trim, a bit of extra room and some added safety features.

Safety:Tire Pressure Monitoring, depowered drivers bag, side airbags, and ABS with EBD.

Efficiency: This is the only reason why I bothered to report on this car.  Over 73.4 miles of Cincinnati hills and gridlock, the car only used a smidge under 2 gallons of fuel.  Let’s assume the previous renter filled-up a ways-out from the lot, and give it 73 miles at 2 gallons.  That’s [B]36.5 MPG[/B].  I could hardly believe it!  Honestly, I didn’t go easy on the go pedal at all.  On the highway (when it opened-up), I set the cruise for about 65-70 and went around town with the traffic (at their hefty pace and acceleration).  The only technique I used was to force an upshift from the slap-shift gear selector.  Otherwise, it was business as usual.

The Drive: Perhaps this is where the Galant makes up for it’s shortcomings.  Steering feedback is precise, torque is well-pronounced, and transmission feel is rather appropriate.  The ride is well-adjusted for the vehicle’s size, which promotes some driving confidence.  Where it starts to sponge out, is during corners with its marshmallow tire sidewall strength.  Save cash on manufacturing where you can, I suppose.

For the Energy Conscious: This car competes with some pretty heavy-hitters in the FE lineup: Accord, Camry, Sonata, Malibu, Fusion.  Further testing would be required, but the only advantage I can see is: 1) Potential FE, and 2) being different (with choice #1 actually paying for itself).

As always, consider the size of vehicle you need. This car may fit the bill for folks looking for a new car with low financing and a gracious warranty.

For an efficient, mid-sized sedan, others are out there.

Raw Data — Specs:
Model: 2009 Mitsubishi Galant
Trim: ES (Base)
Class Size: Mid-Sized Sedan
Transmission: 4-speed automatic with lock-up torque converter
Engine: 2.4L SOHC, 16-Valve, “MIVEC” Variable Valve Timing, I-4
Rating: 160 hp at 5500 RPM and 155 ft-lbs. @ 4000 rpm
Drivetrain: FWD
Seating Capacity: 5 (very snug) at 2+3 or 4 more comfortably at 2+2
RPM @ 60 MPH: 2400
Price as Tested: $21,000 USD (June, 2008)
Curb Weight: 3483 lbs.
EPA: 20/27
EPA Average Fuel Cost per Year: TBD
Emissions: ULEV

Raw Data — Stats:
EcoModder Tested Mileage: [B]36.5 MPG[/B]
Speed Avg: ~40 MPH
Time of Operation: ~1.0 hours
Distance Driven: 73.4 Miles
Ambient Outside Temp: 75-95F
Cruise Speed: 65-70 MPH
Test Loop: Metro Cincinnati, OH
A/C Usage: 100% of time
Wind/Weather: Warm, Humid – Wind calm
Driving Style: Average (including some rush hour jams)

Photos: Edmunds.com

Gen-I Matrix/Vibe:

+ FE vs. Cargo and Passenger Capacity
+ Fun to Drive (especially handling)
+ Added Feature Content

- Uncomfortable Driving Position
- Hodgepodge of Toyota and GM Parts
- Spartan Interior

“New United Motor Manufacturing Inc.” or NUMMI is printed on stickers under the hood. What’s up with that?

That’s the name given the to the GM/Toyota joint venture in Fremont, CA. The unique situation is the History of a UAW manufacturing agreement between General Motors and Toyota, at a facility that has produced Union-made vehicles, such as the:

Chevy Nova (1984-1988)
Geo/Chevy Prizm / Toyota Corolla (1998-2002)
Pontiac Vibe / Toyota Matrix (2003-Present)
…and other vehicles exported abroad.

Background: The Pontiac Vibe and Toyota Matrix were introduced in 2003 as a compact wagon to provide an answer to those looking for a performance-oriented Corolla Wagon, or a domestically-nameplated, small utility vehicle. The secret? Essentially a tall, extended Corolla with GM parts (radio, miscellaneous parts, etc.) + great FE to boot.  Now, a 2009 variant is available with a sleek makeover.  This review examines the Pontiac Vibe, along with the Toyota Matrix.  The latter is available with different outward styling and a near-identical interior, in the 2003-2008 model run.

2008 Toyota Matrix

The First Generation model was introduced about 6 model-years ago. The problem is this: I rented several of both variants over the course, and the FE wasn’t stellar.

Confession: Hypermiling rehab is a slow and steady process. I used to set the cruise for 6-7 MPH over the limit. That ended up being 77 in a 70. With the A/C running in the summer, the transmission was quick to downshift on modest hills, and was quite erratic. The FE suffered terribly. I gave it a shot at the speed limit and no more…

This was the only 4-cylinder vehicle available on the rental lot this week (mid-week slim-pickins). I hopped-in and gave it another try. Nowadays, I set the cruise for the limit and just let it ride. That made all the difference in the World.

On the Inside: The vehicle accomplishes so much in its totality, that I refuse to stress minor inconsistencies. The interior trim is basic and plasticky, but who cares? The look and substance exudes durability, and the FE seals the deal.

Feature content includes a 115V inverter to plug-in AC items (for me — perfect: I’m too cheap to buy an i-Pod, so I use my laptop as an MP3 player and pipe the sound through the speakers through an FM transmitter). Some vehicle models offer an auxiliary input (not in this case).  But hey, rock on…

The cargo area is where this vehicle shines brightly. The rear seats fold flat (including the front passenger seat) to allow the transport of long items. It’s a true wagon, so expect that sort of utility (and appearance).

From the driver’s seat, expect a “love it or hate it” Corolla-like seating position, and a 4-pod dash.   Rear seat passengers may find the legroom cramped if adults are passengers. If kids are the ride-alongs, then it’s perfect — no worries.

On the Outside: The Toyota is more streamlined and Sporty, while the Pontiac displays durability and simple functionality. My test model offered foglamps, a rear wiper, and side skirts. Just speculation: later models seem to offer better aero than previous.

The Drive: Seating position is perhaps the weakest link. Think: SUV height and feel. I had no problem setting the seat to a higher height, moved the seat back and adjusted the tilt wheel. The problem is, some drivers may find this uncomfortable. I’m not at all tall, at 5′ 9″, with short legs. The position wasn’t too bad — although the ideal setup prohibited viewing the top of the instrument cluster through the wheel top (duck-n-view). If you’re unsure of this seat, visit a dealer and give it a shot (the Corolla is very similar).

Cubbies and cupholders abound. Handling is sprite, as is throttle response and acceleration. If you keep the speed down, downshifts are infrequent, and the FE total will thank you. At 60, the engine turns at about 2500. Road noise is adequate, and blind-spots minimal.

Features: The Toyota is more “upscale” in outward appearance. A 5-speed or 6-speed manual is available, as is a higher horsepower 1.8L and/or AWD (up to 2007).  The Pontiac has similar amenities available.

Used Analysis: A 2003 Vibe 5-speed can be picked-up for $8K, on upwards to a fully loaded ’08 Matrix XRS for 22K. The vehicle essentially hasn’t changed since its inception, so you can get the same feature content at a reduced price when purchasing used. In addition, Edmunds.com rated the Matrix/Vibe a “Used Car Best Bet” for reliability, etc.

Vehicle Specs as Tested:

Latest Model: 2008 Toyota Matirix / Pontiac Vibe
Trim: Base
Class Size: Compact Wagon
Transmission: 4-speed automatic with lock-up torque converter (5-speed Manual Available)
Engine: Toyota 1.8L DOHC, 16-Valve, I-4 with Variable Valve Timing
Rating: 126 hp at 6000 RPM and 122 lb-ft torque at 4200
Drivetrain: FWD (AWD available)
Seating Capacity: 5 (very snug) at 2+3 or 4 more comfortably at 2+2
Price as Tested: $17,000 USD (April, 2008)
Curb Weight: 2700 lbs.
EPA: 21/31
EPA Average Fuel Cost per Year: $1554

Raw Data — Stats:
EcoModder Tested Mileage: 35.5 MPG
Average Speed: 57 MPH
Distance Driven: 455 Miles
Engine RPM @ 60 MPH: 2500
Route: Kansas City – Wichita, KS – Kansas City (hit rush hour on the return)
Temp: 40F – 55F
Wind Speed vs. Heading: NW @ 5 MPH. Course 1 = SSW; Return = NNE
2009: Complete Re-design

Conclusion: Brilliant!

If you liked this post, sign up for out RSS Feed for automatic updates.

+ Best Domestic Midsize FE
+ Comfortable Ride for all Passengers
+ Easy, yet Fun to Drive

- Keeps Getting Bigger Every Re-design (how many more times do I have to write this)?
- Low Quality of Interior Parts / Assembly
- Low Resale due to Fleet Sales

Introduction: If you’re familiar with my reviews, you know that I absolutely love the previous generation Malibu. Its simplicity, ergonomics, and fuel economy has earned it several accolades on my part. The new model has some big shoes to fill.

Made alongside the Saturn Aura at the Fairfax Assembly Plant in Kansas City, Kansas, the new Malibu is very similar in dimensions and appearance. The advantage to the Malibu is the available Eco-Tec 4-Cylinder. This all new redesign impacted the Press with its striking exterior, driveability and character (not to mention its larger size).

“2008 North American Car of the Year” by vote. “Car of the Year” boasts Motor Trend Magazine. “Ten Best” says Car and Driver . Others rave of its design; however, I was still apprehensive to drive it. Having driven its twin, the Saturn Aura, my impressions were that it wasn’t a good family representative. Heavy steering, poor V-6 FE, and vague driving feel turned me off to that model’s appeal. So, I stuck with the previous generation Malibu as my tried-and-true companion of 1000’s of efficient miles. Moreover, the new Malibu looks bigger and less efficient than before. The time had come to choose a pinch hitter for a family trip. It turns out that this player just might be from the Major Leagues…

The first trip included a family weekender from Kansas City to the Minneapolis Area / Central Minnesota, and back. Four adults and luggage cruised at 70-75 with ease and efficiency. The second portion was for business: KC – Sioux City, IA and back – with just yours truly.

Note: The 2008 “Malibu Classic”, or last year’s model, can be bought by fleets and the like. These will trickle into the mainstream as they enter the auction block. There is little to identify them, since GM decided not to call it the “Classic” like they did last time.

On the Outside: “It’s the car you can’t ignore”, advertises GM. Two model generations ago, I would have liked to ignore the Malibu by sinking it to the bottom of the Missouri River. Since that horrible lump of a conveyance, each redesign has vastly improved the outward quality of the drivetrain, driving feel, interior and exterior. The new model is vastly different, with a large frontal aspect, sweeping lines, and chopped rear deck. It has a European air about it, with side-marker turn signals and aggressive dual-grille.

Those are actually 5-spoke, 17” steel wheels with plastic wheel covers made to look like chrome. It will fool the average passerby, and give it a more expensive appearance. The taillights match the car’s aggressive demeanor and add to the visual experience.

The 4-cylinder is also available in the upline LTZ model, with satellite radio, heated seats, leather, and other goodies.

On the Inside: The interior is yet another improvement over the last model. The instrument cluster and accent lighting give it an upscale feel. The audio system offered a standard auxiliary input jack and good tone. Interior sound levels were low. There were some things that did not exude quality, however.

As mentioned, the trip included a trip with the the In-Laws to Minneapolis. While loading up at the hotel, one of the rear doors wouldn’t close – something was stuck! In the meantime, a cab driver began honking with impatience. “Hold on a second!” I shouted.

The plastic kickplate trim had come loose and became stuck in the door. I opened the door fully (more honking) and quickly snapped it back into place, but not without getting into a face-to-face argument with the Cabbie. All was resolved after the exchange of “pleasantries”, and we were on our way. Other trim pieces seemed loose or poorly fitted. On my way to Sioux City, an annoying rattle developed in the driver’s door. A few swift wallops took care of it.

Side Note: “I must explain, that it’s not my usual demeanor to get into a shouting match with other drivers (anymore). The hotel was downtown, near the I-35W bridge collapse site. Traffic was mayhem and construction detours seemed to raise the blood pressure of other drivers in the area, including me. The Interstate basically dumped itself into the streets of downtown. One has to stand back and reflect at the number of bridges we take for granted on a daily basis. In this case, it took a major catastrophe to open the eyes of the public. Luckily, the city had several other options to cross the Mississippi, but without GPS, I still would’ve been circling the Metrodome”.

Otherwise, steering-wheel buttons, ergonomically placed controls, and overall comfort and convenience trumped the stumbles in build quality. The dash is swept with more style, yet simple plastic panels are run-of-the-mill. The instrument cluster matches the nighttime “mood lighting” with a pleasant blue-green hue.

The information center cycles Avg. FE, Instant FE, Dual Tripometers, Ambient Temp, Average Speed, Distance to Empty, and other info such as Cruise Control updates. All are accessed within easy reach, on steering wheel.

The trunk is sizable, and stowed a 4-person luggage set with ease. Rear seat passengers are offered a dual cupholder, and plenty of room. The extended length of this model refresh allows for more legroom. Again, all passengers acclaimed that comfort was a definite improvement over the last model.

I have to summarize that the front seats were also very supportive and comfortable – no complaints. With Mother’s Day brunch sitting heavy and the satisfaction of a Red Sox win the night before, the 3 passengers soon drifted to sleep in the quiet abode. And yes, the center armrest is adjustable by sliding forward for elbow comfort (but the door’s rest is solid plastic). A Tilt/Telescoping wheel is standard. This car just might compete in the highly competitive mid-sized family sedan segment.

Safety: To put it bluntly, safety comes standard. The Malibu received 5-Star NHTSA Driver and Passenger impact ratings. Side-curtain airbags are standard on all models, with the driver’s bag deployed based on the weight of the driver. 4-wheel ABS is also standard, as is traction and stability controls.

Efficiency: This engine and transmission combo is a great pair. GM has taken cues from the obvious by making the final gearing taller. With a final drive ratio of 3.29, this rivals the 3.63 of past Inline-4’s. Revs at 60 MPH are approximately 2100, with 70 MPH coming in at 2500. This is traditional GM V-6 territory. Honestly, the 4-banger handled this range excellently. An odd trend during cruise: the torque converter would constantly unlock and lock slightly – in a rhythmic motion. While just cruising along, any reduction in load or throttle would cause the tach to bump up 200 RPM and back down into full lockup. It wasn’t noticeable or felt – just something noticed at the tach. I predict this to be a wear-out point in the future, but may be the secret to the low-RPM drivability of this engine.

A mild-hybrid model is also available, with a slight bump in EPA ratings.

The Drive: Based on GM’s Epsilon platform, the Malibu shares underpinnings with the popularly selling, European Opel/Vauxhall Vectra. For the U.S., Chevy made sure the drive would be “just right”. Electric power steering in the 4-cylinder is easy to operate, yet offers little feedback. This is just fine, since it likely saves on fuel. The ride is perfectly balanced whether loaded or with a lone driver. Cornering is precise and the ride is mid-range (not too harsh or soft). The engine is rev-happy and very efficient. Shifts are firm and deliberate from the 4-speed automatic – that is, until the torque converter slides into lock and back again (and lock again, and back…)

The upline V-6 models come standard with a 6-speed automatic. The top-level LTZ model offers the 6-speed in 4-cylinder trim. This is a curious addition. Hopefully, the FE will benefit. This particular 6-speed was tested in the Saturn Aura and Vue over the last year. Around town, this transmission was indecisive and hesitant to downshift and seemed rather confused as to what to do. The Vue was equipped with the “Manu-Matic” shift gate, so to save on confusion, I did the shifting myself. On the highway, the final gearing proved beneficial, but balked on slight grades. We shall see.

For the Energy Conscious: Surprisingly, GM has come-up with an FE winner in an overall appealing package. This large, mid-size sedan, hits decent FE numbers through common sense techniques. Drive and ride is not compromised, and the looks don’t scream “Rental Car!” If you are after a Domestic, Mid-Sized Family Sedan, look no further. If FE is a priority, Imports such as the Accord, Camry, or Sonata manual-transmission models can offer better economy at a higher price tag.

Loaded up, the average was 28-30 MPG. Single passenger averaged 34-36 MPG.

As always, consider the size of your vehicle needs, and think smaller.

Raw Data — Specs:
Model: 2008 Chevy Malibu
Trim: 1LT
Class Size: Mid-Size Sedan
Transmission: 4-speed automatic with lock-up torque converter
Engine: 2.4L DOHC, 16-Valve, I-4 with Variable Valve Timing
Rating: 169 hp at 6400 RPM and 162 lb-ft torque at 4500
Drivetrain: FWD
Seating Capacity: 5 (very snug) at 2+3 or 4 more comfortably at 2+2
RPM @ 60 MPH: 2100
Price as Tested: $22,500 USD (May, 2008)
ECU Target Coolant Temp: 190F
Curb Weight: 3436 lbs.
EPA: 22/30
EPA Average Fuel Cost per Year: $1842

Raw Data — Stats:
EcoModder Tested Mileage: 31.3 MPG
Speed Avg: 60 MPH
Time of Operation: Lots
Distance Driven: 1791 Miles
Gallons Used: 57.26
Ambient Outside Temp: 50-80F
Cruise Speed: 70-75 MPH
Test Loop: Kansas City – Minneapolis and Central Minnesota – KC – Sioux City, IA – KC
A/C Usage: 5-10% of time
Wind/Weather: Over 4 days: 50-80F Max Tailwind = 25 gusting to 40 MPH, Max Headwind = 20; 20% Rain, 80% Clear
Driving Style: Average, with max sidewall tire pressure applied

If you liked this post, sign up for out RSS Feed for automatic updates.

Real World Review: 2009 Toyota Corolla LE
+ Super Efficient
+ Expected Reliability
+ Handling

- Keeps Getting Bigger Every Re-design (how many times do I have to write this)?
- Low-quality interior feel
- Painful Seating Position in lower-end models

Introduction: The 10th Generation, 2009 Corolla is already out, and it was ripe for the picking. It’s rare anymore to find a variety of FE-friendly vehicles on the lot, so it was selected. I wonder how it’s changed since its redesign?

For Toyota, the Corolla has been the solid poster child of efficiency and simplicity for decades, and all over the world. It sells and sells. As expected this year, it gained some weight – 200 lbs. The base 1.8L now has dual variable valve timing and likely some tweaks to make it more of a fuel sipper. At a glance, the Cd seems to have improved.

If you want more power, a 2.4L engine sourced from the Camry is available. Furthermore, leather, Sat-Nav, and a nifty stereo system can be added. The model tested was the “Rental’s Choice” LE, thankfully without the gaudy fake wood trim.

One note before we get started – you can tell Toyota is slipping on quality. The Interior is one place to easily note this. Secondly, a faulty fuel gauge indicated ¾ tank instead of full on pickup. I immediately went to the pump only to squeeze 0.8 gallons into the tank. Later I noticed the gauge at full, after driving a while. Not good.

This could all be stricken from the record after you see the gas mileage…

On the Outside: I think this is where they spent the most money on the redesign. The exterior has a sporty new looks and a younger feel. The 15” wheels shown are standard. Otherwise, the slab-sided sedan looks run-of-the-mill.

The rear shot seems to be the most attractive, with inset reflectors and a stylish lamp wraparound. The test vehicle was “Blue-Streak Metallic”, which was a striking color and spiced up the overall look and impression. Heated mirrors were equipped with this trim level.

On the Inside: Well, a bit of a disappointment. In this area, it appears as if the Korean makes could be overtaking interior quality. Fit and finish is clunky, and would it kill them to put some padding on the armrest! There’s nothing like driving down the highway resting your elbow on a cinder block. Don’t get me started on the “Park Bench” driver’s seat. You get the picture…

Optional Equipment Shown

Controls were placed within an easy reach, and the instrumentation average. The A/C was frigid and finally, the vents were redesigned to not blow cold air into your eyeball. But the center stack looks like it was taken out of the Kia/Hyundai Spectra/Elantra. Storage bins, nooks, crannies, and a double-door glove box make it practical.

One complaint: the clock was part of a “select-one” instrument cluster menu (and who knows how to set it)? I just used my cell phone or the GPS. Speaking of which, the SG had to be discluded from MPG and speed tests since the speedo was about 5% off. For the first time, though, the speedometer was spot-on with the GPS.

More on the instrument cluster – the display at the left cycled through: Instant FE, average FE, Time of Day, Timer, and Outside Temp. The tripometer had 2 memory positions.

The trunk is good for the car’s size, with a wide opening. Rear seat passengers have little room and a dual cupholder. If the driver is short, you might squeeze 4 people in there. It’s rated for 5 – I call dibs on the window.

Safety: Side-curtain airbags are standard on all models, which will likely earn it a top safety pick. The driver’s bag is deployed based on the weight of the driver. 4-wheel ABS is also standard. Optional are traction/stability controls.

Efficiency: The FE is definitely an improvement over the last model, which says a lot. The outbound leg was calculated at 43.1 MPG. This could be artifact based on the overfill, so the average from the car’s readout and the pump will be taken for both legs. The total averaged FE was 37.9 MPG! This could very well be the most efficient, non-hybrid tested.

The Drive:: Standard compact car fare here. Handling is superb, but the ride is a bit unsettling. Chassis rigidity is up, but there’s a shudder over bumps – similar to a convertible, but less pronounced. The feel is rather “large-car”, with soft responses to dips and undulations. The car is still tossable in the corners. I would recommend some additional tweaking for a more solid feel.

For the Energy Conscious: A manual transmission is available in the “S” and Base models with the 1.8 engine. The S adds sporty touches like ground effects and smoked headlamps and foglamps, and 16-inch wheels. This also opens the door for leather and satellite navigation. The base model is likely the best option with smaller wheels and less overall weight of options.

Consider the size of vehicle you need. This car may fit the bill for young families looking for an efficient, compact sedan. Others out there: Mazda 3, Civic, Kia/Hyundai Spectra/Elantra, Lancer, Sentra.

Raw Data — Specs:
Model: 2009 Toyota Corolla
Trim: LE
Class Size: Compact Sedan
Transmission: 4-speed automatic with lock-up torque converter
Engine: 1.8L DOHC, 16-Valve, I-4 with dual, intelligent variable valve timing
Rating: 132 hp at 6000 RPM and 128 lb-ft torque at 2400
Performance: 0-60 in 9.1 seconds; Skidpad – 0.83g; Slalom – 63.3 MPH
Drivetrain: FWD
Seating Capacity: 5 (very snug) at 2+3 or 4 more comfortably at 2+2
RPM @ 60 MPH: 2400
Price as Tested: $16,750 USD (May, 2008)
ECU Target Coolant Temp: 190F
Curb Weight: 3523 lbs.
EPA: 27/35
EPA Average Fuel Cost per Year: TBD
Emissions: ULEV-II

Raw Data — Stats:
EcoModder Tested Mileage: 37.9 MPG
Speed Avg: 63 MPH
Time of Operation: 2.6 hours
Distance Driven: 446 Miles
Ambient Outside Temp: 60-80F
Cruise Speed: 70-75 MPH
Test Loop: Kansas City – Des Moines – Kansas City
A/C Usage: ~10% of time
Wind/Weather: Outbound – humid, sunny, slight tailwind; Inbound: Party Cloudy, 15 MPH Headwinds gusting to 20
Driving Style: Average

If you liked this post, sign up for out RSS Feed for automatic updates.