Learning about how manuals are operated during the EPA test -- with prescribed (non-eco) shift points and prohibited coasting -- makes it clear why it's far easier to beat the EPA (by a bigger margin) with a stick than a slushbox or CVT:
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...ing-27416.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmafanp
This is great I would love to take a smash and go driver using both manual an auto and compare te differences in real world scenarios clearly the manual would win but I want numbers thanks
|
It's going to depend on the individual car, but here are numbers for a couple:
2014 Mitsubishi Mirage 1.2L:Automatic CVT
40 mpg (US) -- combined EPA rating
39.2 mpg (US) -- average of 17 actual owners
Manual 5-speed
37 mpg (US) -- combined EPA rating
42.7 mpg (US) -- average of 11 actual owners
source: Mirage fuel economy log - MirageForum.com
2012-2014 Nissan Versa 1.6L sedan
Automatic CVT & 4-speed
32.5 mpg (US) -- combined EPA rating (average of CVT & 4SP)
32.7 mpg (US) -- average of 14 actual owners
Manual 5-speed
30 mpg (US) -- combined EPA rating
35.6 mpg (US) -- average of 6 actual owners
source: Micra 1.6 real world fuel economy / mileage reports from owners - Micra-Forum.com
Fuelly -
analyze Fuelly sucks because it doesn't break out transmission type or engine size in its data, but if you comb through details/results for a specific vehicle, you can sometimes put together a comparison based on drivetrain.
Quote:
|
assuming one wants to save the most amount of fuel possible and is not the only driver of the car (wife)
|
This is a HUGE wildcard. I regularly hear manual drivers (I'm talking non-performance car types) driving down the road near the speed limit (50 km/h / 30 mph) in 2nd gear in my neighbourhood. If you don't have the knowledge/skill/motivation, you're better off in an automatic for several reasons, not just MPG.