Quote:
Originally Posted by trebuchet03
Is the Caliber's aero really that bad? I was able to climb the mountains through Albuquerque in my Jetta @70mph - smallest engine available (110hp versus the Caliber's 14?) - both cars are about the same weight I believe (awd?). Don't know if I could go faster - I just had my cruise control set the whole time. When I had an HPV on my roof - those same climbs were between 55 and 60mph floored (I was also loaded with a summer's worth of gear  ). I hung out in the semi-truck lane  Going back down was awesome though |
I had Cruise on, and to keep around 65 it went from 2000 rpm to about 3000rpm. To go 75 I'd probably have to floor it, or get close to it. The Caliber's aero isn't that bad, I think it's the CVT tranny, you can't glide in it. It's the R/T, so it's got a 2.4L that makes 176ish hp (don't remember) Had the whole car packed and had everyone in there, playing a nintendo gamecube in the back even. I think we went 300 odd miles per tank going there. It's 2wd. I was in the fastlane most of the time until a honda would come behind me at around 90-100 and I'd switch lanes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trebuchet03
I know that's a comparison between a sedan and hatch - but that makes me even that much more angry at GM |
Uh... Dodge is a Chrysler vehicle..
Quote:
Originally Posted by trebuchet03
In any case, I personally don't classify a car as a fuel sipper unless it gets >30mpg (my car is on the fence, morso not, without good technique ). It's almost as if the mfr's break 100hp just for the sake of breaking 100 :/ |
I think on that whole trip we got pretty good fuel mileage despite going that fast, I think it was the downhills that helped.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trebuchet03
Gliding is very different than cruising.... But, and I should have made this more clear (my fault), my comparison was between two different engines. One that can make more power versus one that makes less  |
oh, I see.