Evo X MPG
On my way home from the dealer I reset the MPG on the info center. Running down the highway I averaged 26 mpg at 72 mph. The car only had about 100 miles on it at the time. That seems to be right on par with what my 03 GSR would get. In mixed driving around town and some highway driving too, my MPG is showing around 23.5 mpg and an average speed of 35 mph. So it gets much better than what the window sticker EPA info is showing, at least mine does. Once the breakin period is over 380 miles left, the MPG will probably fall, when the boost begins to rise.
Brian
Brian
if you want want 60mpg, then obviously X is not for you, better wait for the VW POLO that is supposed to get up to 76MPG and put prius to shame
or just keep driving your cavalier
or just keep driving your cavalier
FYI comparing the MPG of small mid-sized 4 cylinder to a V8'd Tahoe/etc that weighs 1000-2000lbs more is ridiculous.
That's like saying... wow I'm pretty strong because my little sister can only bench 60lbs but I can bench 185lbs...
185 still sucks if you care considering what other people can do.
So does the MPG of the evo.
I would imagine a new tune may help a little bit with mpg but don't expect miracles... probably only 1 mpg difference either way. Also if your tune includes adding HP increasing items you will probably actually burn MORE gas.
The lackluster MPG is the silver bullet that keeps me from fully pulling the trigger on the evo x. First the hype cleared and the car was slower than it was supposed to be, then the price was more than they had originally estimated... I could live with all that, but then the MPG came out and that was the end of it for me, at least for now.
When premium hits $3.50-$4.00 next summer we will see how much people care. If most American's attitudes are 'well it gets better gas mileage than my Hummer" no wonder we are in the ****ty situation we are now in.
There is no reason with all the new engineering we have that we don't have good sized cars getting 60mpg with ease. Heck they had diesel VW rabbits that could get about that in the late 1970s....
My 97 cavalier got 30-32mpg guess how much the new cobalt gets? about 30mpg highway... in 2008... 11 years of engineering and the industry hasn't done **** other than a few hybrid cars that really only get a few extra mpg.
Even the prius which is like a battery on wheels gets low 40mpg.
That's like saying... wow I'm pretty strong because my little sister can only bench 60lbs but I can bench 185lbs...
185 still sucks if you care considering what other people can do.
So does the MPG of the evo.
I would imagine a new tune may help a little bit with mpg but don't expect miracles... probably only 1 mpg difference either way. Also if your tune includes adding HP increasing items you will probably actually burn MORE gas.
The lackluster MPG is the silver bullet that keeps me from fully pulling the trigger on the evo x. First the hype cleared and the car was slower than it was supposed to be, then the price was more than they had originally estimated... I could live with all that, but then the MPG came out and that was the end of it for me, at least for now.
When premium hits $3.50-$4.00 next summer we will see how much people care. If most American's attitudes are 'well it gets better gas mileage than my Hummer" no wonder we are in the ****ty situation we are now in.
There is no reason with all the new engineering we have that we don't have good sized cars getting 60mpg with ease. Heck they had diesel VW rabbits that could get about that in the late 1970s....
My 97 cavalier got 30-32mpg guess how much the new cobalt gets? about 30mpg highway... in 2008... 11 years of engineering and the industry hasn't done **** other than a few hybrid cars that really only get a few extra mpg.
Even the prius which is like a battery on wheels gets low 40mpg.
On one hand we could argue that we shouldn't expect an AWD sports sedan that can oust the best of them to have the fuel sipping ability of an economy car like a honda civic. Both my WRX and Evo have never gotten exceptional mpg... but I'm not complaining because of the performance I get.
Then on the other hand, you have LSx powered Corvettes that can get 26 mph. They are pushing way more displacement and are normally aspirated. We aren't always pushing boost on the highway so wtf?
Then on the other hand, you have LSx powered Corvettes that can get 26 mph. They are pushing way more displacement and are normally aspirated. We aren't always pushing boost on the highway so wtf?
Last edited by Mmelmann; Feb 25, 2008 at 06:18 AM.
It takes a certain amount of HP to move a given vehicle at a constant speed. Once up to speed the HP required is a funciton of aerodynamic drag, rolling resistance, and frictional loses in the powertrain. Rolling resistance varies depending on tire width, tire pressure, raining, and the smoothness of the roads and maybe a few others. So if the LSx cars in the vette are getting 26 mpg on the highway, then they are very efficient in the RPM range they are running (probably the ridiculously overdriven 6 gear). This does not surprise me considering the aerodynamics of that car and the frontal area. The Evo has a much larger frontal area (area exposed to the wind). The Evo should have a smaller rolling resistance due to the narrower tires than the LSx cars. The powertrain frictional loses would be much greater in the Evo due to the AWD. The V8 motor in those cars should have more frictional loses due to the 4 additional pistons and additional mass rotating in the motor itself.
Nonetheless, the Evo still gets good mileage for a car as capable as it is with nearly 300 hp, and still driving all 4 wheels.
The Evo X in my opinion should get exactly the same gas mileage as the Evo 8 and Evo 9 if not slightly better. This should be the case because of the slightly improved aerodynamics and the new engine design with MIVEC on both cams along with the direct actuating cam type.
Brian
Nonetheless, the Evo still gets good mileage for a car as capable as it is with nearly 300 hp, and still driving all 4 wheels.
The Evo X in my opinion should get exactly the same gas mileage as the Evo 8 and Evo 9 if not slightly better. This should be the case because of the slightly improved aerodynamics and the new engine design with MIVEC on both cams along with the direct actuating cam type.
Brian
Turbodawg, you're a fart smeller... I mean smart feller.
I was going to post similar thoughts with regards to the rolling resistance, frictional loss with the engines, aerodynamic drag, molecular compositions... the theory of lift... who shot J.R... etc. but my primitave intellect prevented me from doing so.
I was going to post similar thoughts with regards to the rolling resistance, frictional loss with the engines, aerodynamic drag, molecular compositions... the theory of lift... who shot J.R... etc. but my primitave intellect prevented me from doing so.
The car needs to be built to handle altitudes from below sea level to 10,000 feet above from temperatures that are well below freezing to scorching desert heat. Running rich is the best compromise for a boosted car that will be sold worldwide.
Newbie
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
It takes a certain amount of HP to move a given vehicle at a constant speed. Once up to speed the HP required is a funciton of aerodynamic drag, rolling resistance, and frictional loses in the powertrain. Rolling resistance varies depending on tire width, tire pressure, raining, and the smoothness of the roads and maybe a few others. So if the LSx cars in the vette are getting 26 mpg on the highway, then they are very efficient in the RPM range they are running (probably the ridiculously overdriven 6 gear). This does not surprise me considering the aerodynamics of that car and the frontal area. The Evo has a much larger frontal area (area exposed to the wind). The Evo should have a smaller rolling resistance due to the narrower tires than the LSx cars. The powertrain frictional loses would be much greater in the Evo due to the AWD. The V8 motor in those cars should have more frictional loses due to the 4 additional pistons and additional mass rotating in the motor itself.
Nonetheless, the Evo still gets good mileage for a car as capable as it is with nearly 300 hp, and still driving all 4 wheels.
The Evo X in my opinion should get exactly the same gas mileage as the Evo 8 and Evo 9 if not slightly better. This should be the case because of the slightly improved aerodynamics and the new engine design with MIVEC on both cams along with the direct actuating cam type.
Brian
Nonetheless, the Evo still gets good mileage for a car as capable as it is with nearly 300 hp, and still driving all 4 wheels.
The Evo X in my opinion should get exactly the same gas mileage as the Evo 8 and Evo 9 if not slightly better. This should be the case because of the slightly improved aerodynamics and the new engine design with MIVEC on both cams along with the direct actuating cam type.
Brian
[QUOTE=slammin86;5337254]My pig of a GTO will pull down 26-29 mpg on the hwy. At 65 mph I am at about 2000 rpm in 6th gear. It is a 04 equipt with the ls1.[/QUOTE
Although your GTO may be a pig, the weight plays a very small part of the equation to keep a vehicle moving at a certain constant velocity. The wind drag and rolling drag far out weight the mass of the vehicle in consideration of HP required.
Brian
Although your GTO may be a pig, the weight plays a very small part of the equation to keep a vehicle moving at a certain constant velocity. The wind drag and rolling drag far out weight the mass of the vehicle in consideration of HP required.
Brian
so 16=18=IX=X
