View Single Post
Old 09-16-2014, 12:52 PM   #30 (permalink)
Xist
Not Doug
 
Xist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Show Low, AZ
Posts: 12,188

Chorizo - '00 Honda Civic HX, baby! :D
90 day: 35.35 mpg (US)

Mid-Life Crisis Fighter - '99 Honda Accord LX
90 day: 34.2 mpg (US)

Gramps - '04 Toyota Camry LE
90 day: 35.39 mpg (US)

Don't hit me bro - '05 Toyota Camry LE
90 day: 30.49 mpg (US)
Thanks: 7,225
Thanked 2,218 Times in 1,709 Posts
Moderators, you have my permission to delete this argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmick View Post
Sorry, false. I can prove the 31, you can't prove 21, because it never was.


I linked my source, which you seem to have ignored. Here it is:


Apparently, by "GM," you meant Chevrolet, not GMC. I understand that it is mostly a matter of badging, but their EPA ratings differ. Here is just the Chevrolet pickup's ratings:



Quote:
Originally Posted by 2000mc View Post
Where does the 31 figure come from?
Fueleconomy.gov puts an '84 at 22mpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmick View Post
Is that for the 1986 S-10? The S-10 was what you called full-sized? How does the 2.8L engine prove the fuel efficiency of a 2.8L diesel from three years previous?

I am not trying to argue or insult. Had the EPA said 31 MPG, I would have posted that to support you. In these forums, members expect people to support claims. Instead of asking for your source, I looked it up. If you can support the 1983 6.2L diesel being rated 31 MPG, I will happily delete all of my responses. If you start your own thread about the 1983 31 MPG 6.2L diesel, I will move my messages there, and we can clean up this thread.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	83 Chevrolet EPA.png
Views:	174
Size:	47.4 KB
ID:	15840  
  Reply With Quote