87 mpg rated, 1989 Citroen AX 14dtr
 

Why doesn't anyone seem to have this car, it was in the 2000 guiness world record book. A specialized driver sqeezed 112 mpg out of it, this is what the record was in the book. According to wikipedia the mpg rating in US units was 87 mpg, also the car had a 0.31 cd. I bet it was really underpowered. It ran on diesel.

EDIT: upon research in order to find one for sale I could find only a few, possibly the reason why no one has one, though that was still a skim search. In imperial units the mpg is rated 100.

I've done over 95mpg for over 200 miles in my 2012 Prius which weighs twice as much as that car. :p

http://fatalfoo.com/pics/Cars/Prius/...20233miles.jpg

Wow
 

... that's good.

In the real world the AX does around 52mpg.
Übersicht: Citroen - AX - Spritmonitor.de

It`s still a cute car though, while newer small diesels do achieve even better fuel economy, they can never be as robust and simple to service as this was.

Thats a sad looking car.

Why doesn't anyone own them? Try to find your nearest Citroen dealer...

Thanks Piwoslaw for pointing out to my thread.

Well, here in France, a lot of people still drive in AXs. But I don't think it was ever distributed in the US, thus the 'secret' status of this car on ecomodder.
The car you are referring to is the 1994 prototype that was never sold. It had 50 hp for 670 kg, a 'not too bad' weight/power ratio but it was outweighed by high gearing.
The production car was at 65/71 mpg (depending on version).
That's a very good figure, congrats. But only comparable things can be compared. Seeing the difference between the 95 mpg and your '90 day 62 mpg' makes me think that the conditions must have been very favorable. The question is : "how much would you have done with the AX in the same conditions ?".

The only car that achieved better fuel economy was the Lupo 3L. I had the opportunity to test a Golf 6 TDI rated at 3,4 l/100 km (extra urban), I did 3,39 l with the same driving that would get me 2,8 with my AX. The best cars on the market are rated 3,0/3,2, worse than the AX.
As said, the only cars that are better than me on spritmonitor are Lupo/A2 3L. I have yet to see another car beat me (on a regular basis).

I was being a bit tongue in check. The AX is no more a modern safety-minded car than the 1992 Geo Metro is. I was making the case that there are modern cars with much better safety and nice amenities that offer comparable fuel economy. The mpg quoted by the OP and Wikipedia was a publicity stunt. Such numbers have been achieved in the Prius, Passat TDi and other similar vehicles that conform to modern safety standards and weigh twice as much as the AX and have more space. I'm not downing the car so much as pointing out the obvious differences between historic fuel efficient cars and modern ones. One also has to remember that official ratings prior to 2008 are hard to compare to new EPA ratings. The Prius is rated for 72.4mpg (3.25 L/100km) in the UK right?

Besides, my 95mpg was U.S. gallons. :) I got a 109+mpg pulse & glide trip but it was only 62miles. Both with no net elevation change.

Well yes I know Citroens were not sold in the US during the time of the AX. I was wondering why the ecomodding community members from the countries in which it was sold do not have more posted on the site, in the garage. That may be most attributable to the fact that most of the ecomodding members seem to be from North America, though that's just an assumption. Also other cars may just be better.