Is this real? (Page 2/3)
skywurz JUN 08, 11:53 PM
I really like to use https://www.fuelly.com to get real life numbers for a car type (like if you are hunting around for your next commuter). Unfortunately it does not work as well for older or more obscure cars.
ls3mach JUN 09, 01:04 AM

quote
Originally posted by skywurz:

I really like to use https://www.fuelly.com to get real life numbers for a car type (like if you are hunting around for your next commuter). Unfortunately it does not work as well for older or more obscure cars.



I've used it and gas buddy a long while. I'm not in the market for a gas saver. My original post was that I think GM makes garbage, gets garbage mpg, has garbage performance even though MPG is terrible too. Fit and finish is junk and how they should never have received a penny from tax payers, but then I came across that and got sidetracked. It is hard to get solid numbers on Fuellybeother. I was looking at it a few days ago ad I got 7.5 MPG over 100 miles. I'm not sure what happened, but I don't recall ever seeing those numbers, but there were others with that number. There is about 6 engines and 6 body configurations though, so it's impossible
Especially considering most of us haul trailers or loads.

Ogre the only car I could not constantly beat EPA was my AMG E63.
cvxjet JUN 09, 01:32 AM
My 85 Fiero had EPA numbers; 19-26...I actually got 20-28....and I drove it stock (2.8/4spd) for 15 years...Now, with the 3.4 F-body/5spd, I get 19-30.

My 1999 Firebird Formula w/auto was rated 17-26.....I would get 19-20 around town and over 30 on the highway.

Strangely, numerous friends had Honda Accords that would NEVER get what they were rated at.....I also remember hearing where the Accord for MPG testing weighed 2800 lbs, while the one they tested for crash safety weighed 3200 lbs....I am sure that Honda would never even consider doing anything dishonest.......Thpppt!
hyperv6 JUN 09, 06:23 AM
My 85 V6 always got 21 city 25 highway back when I drove it daily back in the 80's.

That was good back then. Now my truck a 4500 pound 308 HP 3.6 Canyon crew 4x4 is sitting at 20.1 MPG average for 18,000 miles. Times have changed.
ls3mach JUN 09, 11:22 AM

quote
Originally posted by hyperv6:

My 85 V6 always got 21 city 25 highway back when I drove it daily back in the 80's.

That was good back then. Now my truck a 4500 pound 308 HP 3.6 Canyon crew 4x4 is sitting at 20.1 MPG average for 18,000 miles. Times have changed.



That is around what I got when my V6 Fiero auto was in decent running order, which wasn't often. I was 17 and well.

I've gotten about around your Canyon in my 5.4 F150. It is an automatic Lariat 4 door. A family friend is driving it now. I'll text and see what he is getting. Ge drives super conservative like i do. Pretty useless for any work, much like the Canyon. 23 is I think what I get when I was traveling it back and forth between Oklahoma and Louisiana. I had the 5.6 Toyota and while it was newer than my F150 it got a bit better MPG. Again, fairly useless as a truck.

I realize half tin trucks can tow and such. The dinky engines mixed with all the fancy options and the small bed is what kills it for us. We haul stainless and the pipe and tube are 20' lengths. I like to put mine over the cab. Plus I need the full bed for 2 pallets.

On another note. I have experienced the engine that couldn't. The 4.2L V6 Ford used. I barely got 20MPG ( if that) even after a full tune up. I liked those tricks just fine, but useless. I ended up using both of them as lawn type trucks. I had a 97' with virtually the same configuration except auto ND the 5.4. It got really the same or better MPG and was rode pretty hard its' whole life.

[This message has been edited by ls3mach (edited 06-09-2022).]

Awalker W02 JUN 09, 03:09 PM
When I was going to school I became friends with a professor who owned multiple fieros. He claimed that he had only been able to reach an average of 42 or 45 with his eco model. This also involved very intense hyper mileaging. Following semis and drafting the wake. Never exceeding 55 and coasting down hill.
Still astonishing numbers for the period.
ls3mach JUN 09, 11:21 PM

quote
Originally posted by Awalker W02:

When I was going to school I became friends with a professor who owned multiple fieros. He claimed that he had only been able to reach an average of 42 or 45 with his eco model. This also involved very intense hyper mileaging. Following semis and drafting the wake. Never exceeding 55 and coasting down hill.
Still astonishing numbers for the period.



Doesn't seem impressive to me to have to go through that much effort for what isn't great MPG. Even in that area it wasn't great.

https://www.mpgomatic.com/2...-mpg-cars-1978-1981/


This wasn't meant as a.bash thread. I've never seen one touch those numbers. Not even new.
Fierochic88 JUN 10, 12:23 PM
My husband regularly drives our 86 coupe back and forth to work and averages 37-38. It is sporting the Izuzu 5 speed and he's mainly traveling the highway.

~ Jen
theogre JUN 10, 02:19 PM

quote
Originally posted by Fierochic88:
My husband regularly drives our 86 coupe back and forth to work and averages 37-38. It is sporting the Izuzu 5 speed and he's mainly traveling the highway.

~ Jen

Same here when drive mostly or all highway, more so huge flat section of I90 etc.
But if you have to climb hills like I81 in NY or PATP Northeast Ext now called I476 and MPG will drop vs NJTP and others w/ very flat roads.
hyperv6 JUN 10, 07:54 PM

quote
Originally posted by ls3mach:


That is around what I got when my V6 Fiero auto was in decent running order, which wasn't often. I was 17 and well.

I've gotten about around your Canyon in my 5.4 F150. It is an automatic Lariat 4 door. A family friend is driving it now. I'll text and see what he is getting. Ge drives super conservative like i do. Pretty useless for any work, much like the Canyon. 23 is I think what I get when I was traveling it back and forth between Oklahoma and Louisiana. I had the 5.6 Toyota and while it was newer than my F150 it got a bit better MPG. Again, fairly useless as a truck.

I realize half tin trucks can tow and such. The dinky engines mixed with all the fancy options and the small bed is what kills it for us. We haul stainless and the pipe and tube are 20' lengths. I like to put mine over the cab. Plus I need the full bed for 2 pallets.

On another note. I have experienced the engine that couldn't. The 4.2L V6 Ford used. I barely got 20MPG ( if that) even after a full tune up. I liked those tricks just fine, but useless. I ended up using both of them as lawn type trucks. I had a 97' with virtually the same configuration except auto ND the 5.4. It got really the same or better MPG and was rode pretty hard its' whole life.




Well my Canyon may not haul 20foot pipe but it dies all the work easily for my needs.

It has more to do about what kind of work you haul. My cargo is more engines, tires, body parts etc. Also I have hauled mulch up to the top of the roof level with nary a sag or problem with the engine hauling it.

It also easily goes up to 7,000 pounds but I generally have little need of a trailer.

It also hauled all our things for my sons racing with no problem.

Not everyone’s needs are the same what is useless to some is just right for others needs.

A one ton dulley for me would be over kill and not needed.

I suppose that is why they make so many different trucks. Like shoes you buy what fits. Unless you just like spending money in some cases.