![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Serious Business
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New York
Moto: 1993 ZX-11 2008 CBR1000rr
Posts: 9,723
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Elitist
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Moto: Gix 750
Posts: 11,351
|
![]() ![]() Good quality car, but 24/29 mpg? Weaksauce......I was expecting a lot more. Bring back the RWD SR2. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Serious Business
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New York
Moto: 1993 ZX-11 2008 CBR1000rr
Posts: 9,723
|
![]() Quote:
I drive a Camry ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
AMA Supersport
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,756
|
![]() Quote:
Second, keep in mind the EPA rejiggered how they reach their mileage estimates a few years ago. In the process they went back and lowered them for older cars as well. A 2000 5 speed Corolla is now listed at 27 city/34 highway. It used to be 31 city/38 highway. The 3 speed slushbox from the video used to be 28c/32h. Go look up some of the past cars you view as having been "efficient" and I'll bet they don't live up to your expectations either. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Elitist
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Moto: Gix 750
Posts: 11,351
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
AMA Supersport
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,756
|
![]() Quote:
Concerning the mileage your parents were getting with that Civic look it up on fueleconomy.gov . It is the EPA's website listing mileage. I'll bet they were getting better mileage than the EPA now says the car is capable of. The Corolla should respond similarly to a lighter foot. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Viff6N Mutated Warrior
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Texas
Moto: '01 Honda VFR 800 & '09 ER-6N
Posts: 8,704
|
![]()
I rolf'd.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|