MPG monthly competition

[GeneralZod]

I think this is how it will need to be posted.

Example:
Style: hatchback/sedan
Engine: 1.4/1.8
Transmission: AT/MT
Stock/tune
Octane/fuel
Miles since last fill up
Gallons of gasoline
Notes

 

[Red_RS]

I think this is how it will need to be posted.

Example:
Style: hatchback/sedan
Engine: 1.4/1.8
Transmission: AT/MT
Stock/tune
Octane/fuel
Miles since last fill up
Gallons of gasoline
Notes

Style: hatchback/sedan/RS

 

[GeneralZod]

Style: hatchback/sedan/RS

Nice

 

[Macehammer]

What's so hard to believe? Smit got 67mpg over the course of a tank in his Sonic... Ask him

Ok, seems the Militant Responders have come out in response to my post. Good.

First things first. I'm not gonna ask anyone anything. Why? Because there are multiple factors, breakdowns, errors of omission that come into play that mean "taking someone's word for it" is actually in reality more like "being taken for a ride."

I'm sure Eric has reported what Eric has reported. I'm sure you are restating something he buried in some thread somewhere, and as it stands, as far as I've seen, with everything I know and/or have read on here (Every thread on the forum, btw) Eric seems to be honest, straightforward, and know what he is talking about. But it's a far difference between my assessment of Eric written directly before this line (sorry you got dragged into this, Eric, you were their example, not mine) and the concept or notion that Eric is infallible, or that Eric doesn't have either the capacity and/or motivation to lie (make no mistake; this isn't an accusation, I'm just pointing out he is a human being, after all)

So Eric has posted what he has posted. Eric has gotten the mileage he has gotten. Factually, these two things MIGHT NOT correspond to one another, potentially.

Second, you are claiming Eric has posted what you say he has posted, and I might try to dredge that up somewhere but I have not the care nor motivation to do so. I am sure you believe what you believe, but let Eric endorse, re-quantify, or validate that claim. This "Eric says.." crap has got to go....

Three, and this is the most important part of all of this really. I don't give a sh*t what kind of mileage you can get with your car while coasting downhill for forty miles to save gas and doing 35mph overall....

That's not driving your f*cking car. It's called being a hazard to other drivers.

Four, when I say you can't get that mileage on your car, I mean whilst performing in similar conditions as the EPA mileage estimates calculate/assume.

Now...

Why? Because that's the godd*mn standard. B*tch about the standard as much as you want; it is what it is.

Your precious VW doesn't get an EPA estimated 50mpg. If it did, VW sales would be a lot higher in the US than they are. And I don't give a sh*t what your Fuelly stats are either, because Fuelly is easily manipulated.

You can hypermile your entire driving experience for all I care. It is not beneficial data for a normal operator, because it doesn't illustrate a general or common experience...

I'm sure I'll keep reading this thread. If you are looking for some less combative posts from myself from this point realize my point of view, and realize that a plastic world view or standards can't be maintained when you are trying to coexist in an atmosphere containing flammables (ME).

 

[GeneralZod]

I brought no one into this but my experiences. The fact that someone else did please don't lump me into that. I think First did it for the innocent fact that driving in a SAFE manner, the EPA AVERAGE can be beat. However, did you ever read the EPA ranges? My Sonic sticker posted 37 mpg highway average with up to 48 mpg. You are reading the averages, which as you know means cars will be much higher or lower due to conditions and environment.

Look closely at the sticker.

http://www.cars.com/crp/buyingGuides/images/16k_2012_Chevrolet_Sonic.jpg

I don't find my past VW precious, which is why I traded it in. The cam was going bad due to a flawed design. However, as I stated, the average highway for my 2006 was 41 mpg with a high of the 50s. My 2003 was 49 mpg with close to 60 mpg. This is the very standard you are talking about.

Not sure where you are going with this militant stuff either. I bust balls as many here do. I am not looking for some fight in search of mister combustible (YOU). You tend to list facts, but do it in generalizations. That isn't the use of facts, but a debate tactic. If you don't believe, fine. Doesn't bother me.

If it inflames you this much, just disregard any and all information for the purposes of MPG. I just find that viewpoint, without any attempt to try it yourself or even research what others are doing, to be shortsighted.

 

[Macehammer]

Hey, what I said, initially, is that VW owners are a bunch of bullsh*tters.

I stand behind that remark because I know several VW owners; they are bullsh*tters. ...especially on the topic of their VWs mythical mileage.

Never once said it can't be done. But it's not likely, if it does that number would be the average, or the average would be much closer to it.

I'm not interested in getting into a p*ssing match, but if someone here is going to go to some absurd length of hypermiling to get the best mpg rating that could ever be had by following 2 inches behind an 18-wheeler down the side of Mt. Everest, fine.

Just don't start claiming the Sonic can reach that efficiency. And 67mpg isn't gonna be standard, and shouldn't be put forth as an achievable goal, because if you start saying this the non-Sonic community is gonna start believing its true, and largely it's not.

It will give our car a bad image. It will make is look like a bunch of bullsh*tters. We shouldn't be doing that. My credibility is important to me. By extension, yours is also.

 

[GeneralZod]

I'm not interested in getting into a p*ssing match, but if someone here is going to go to some absurd length of hypermiling to get the best mpg rating that could ever be had by following 2 inches behind an 18-wheeler down the side of Mt. Everest, fine.

Just don't start claiming the Sonic can reach that efficiency. And 67mpg isn't gonna be standard, and shouldn't be put forth as an achievable goal, because if you start saying this the non-Sonic community is gonna start believing its true, and largely it's not.

It will give our car a bad image. It will make is look like a bunch of bullsh*tters. We shouldn't be doing that. My credibility is important to me. By extension, yours is also.

I will skip the newest generalization of VW owners.

But, the above quoted, who ever said any of that? This is just to see how other people's mpg stats rate.

:blankface:

 

[Macehammer]

What's so hard to believe? Smit got 67mpg over the course of a tank in his Sonic... Ask him

This is the statement about the effective high watermark theoretical mpg in a Sonic.

I'm the one that said VW owners are bullsh*tters.

Having fun is having fun. Just don't turn a simple contest into something that damages the platform, or the forum. I'm gonna stick with the people here to have fun, and/or do cool things to/for their car.

 

[Preloader]

Tension breaker......

The best calculated trip mileage I've seen on a full tank of e85 was 241 miles.:sadbanana:

Oh:
1.4T hatch MT LTZ

 

[Macehammer]

That's not so bad...

 

[Preloader]

Back when I was running 91 on stock injectors, I was typically getting 380-390 miles/tank. So on E85 I'm getting 40% less miles a tank, and only saving 20% on cost of fuel ups.

So that is numerical proof that e85 is not cost efficient over 91. But I'm on a quest for fast, not frugal.

Hahaha. Great name for a hyper mile ricer movie.......
The Fast and the Frugal: Tokyo Draft

 

[GeneralZod]

Tension breaker......

The best calculated trip mileage I've seen on a full tank of e85 was 241 miles.:sadbanana:

Oh:
1.4T hatch MT LTZ

Next month if you want post your stats. I will have the format up. I was hoping for a spreadsheet guru to make us one, but I might have to check the interwebz to basically steal one.

 

[Preloader]

Curious if 14 pounds off of the flywheel/clutch will help or hurt mpg.
Predictions?

 

[Macehammer]

Same power output, same gravity, same friction, less weight. Better mpg, might not be a greater than 1mpg gain. Hard to measure...

 

[GeneralZod]

Highway on level ground, no difference. City and town driving, the gain could be surprisingly positive.

If you can avoid the temptation of smoking tires.

 

[Preloader]

The difference could be the lack of throttle needed to rev match during shifts with the stock flywheel. Potentially no throttle is needed, as the large mass keeps the revs up.

So this may hurt my MPG as much as the lighter weight helps MPG.

I predict it will be a wash. But on e85 it will be hard to perceive any gain/loss, because it appears MPG is hardly dependent on driving behavior.

 

[Eric Smit]

I think you'll see a loss.

 

[GeneralZod]

The amount of fuel needed to rev match around town isn't much compared to the constant acceleration of in town driving. The efficiency of acceleration has gone up.

Combined I am not sure you will see much. Now, if you did an entire tank of in town, I think you would be surprised.

The other factor is you. How can you not mash the gears or the go pedal.

 

[sx sonic]

If you go with the generalized standard of 1lbs of wheel weight equates to a 3lb body loss, and 1lb of weight at engine speed = 15lbs (crap can remember if that one's right) then you should see an increse.

Also the sonic gets 11 mpg at MAX FORCE speed, and even worse in first. True 93 oct story.

 

[Turbo Lover]

People generally see increases in city MPG with lightweight crank pulleys, and I saw my best city tank ever in my Accord while I had one on. I don't see why not with a LWFW, driving habits being equal.

Also, I realize there is a clusterf$*# of categories already, but how about the most important one: cold climate, or warm climate? If I have anything less than 175 miles on my tank, my DIC drops like a stone when I start it up dead cold and drive it. To the point I don't reach the original MPG until I've been driving 50 on the interstate for over 5 miles and the car is completely warm by the time I get on. Perhaps this would be fair if done over the Summer? Some of us are still dealing with 30 degree temps and winter fuel, and are at a major disadvantage before we even step foot in our car.