View Single Post
Old 08-20-2008, 08:41 AM   #7 (permalink)
99metro
Master EcoModder
 
99metro's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Briggsdale, Colorado
Posts: 291

putt-putt - '99 Metro Base
Team Metro
90 day: 57.98 mpg (US)

Dusty - '89 Bronco XLT
90 day: 13.89 mpg (US)

Cowboy - '90 Bronco XLT
90 day: 17.42 mpg (US)

HayHauler - '06 3500 ST
Team Cummins
90 day: 18.03 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3
Thanked 29 Times in 12 Posts
Make sure that the car you are comparing to is exactly like yours - same year, engine, transmission, trim - these all make a difference in the fueleconomy.gov values. Manufactures can make small differences between model years with the seemingly same spec vehicle, enough to make MPG differences. I agree we should all be using the same "new" standard. I noticed a few vehicles like mine are still using the old EPA values.

I believe playing fair is the only way to go. I have noticed that there are some who only drive less than a mile, or a very short distance, and claim/post their 115mpg or so. Gee, that was great, but I could do that too. Then they are the top dog in a category when it comes to fuel economy. Are they dishonest? Technically no, but this is very misleading. I personally believe things should be documented tank to tank, and not using a Scangauge or similar for short distance stuff. I see this on other fuel economy documentation sites also.

rant done
__________________
2006 3500 Dodge QC/FB 5.9 handshaker
  Reply With Quote