3rd Apr 2007, 12:01
14:29 obviously doesn't read much. A magazine testing the new Highlander hybrid got a WHOPPING 17MPG HIGHWAY!! That's worse than most full-size, non-hybrid domestic SUV's. Our midsize, non-hybrid GM SUV gets 24mpg highway and puts out over 100hp more than the V-6 Highlander.
3rd Apr 2007, 12:42
Sorry, but I've been keeping track of my mileage for years and years. I consistently get 13 city/18 highway, and about 14 mixed. And why are you bringing in hybrids, when the discussion is about the pathetic mileage of the V-8 Toyota SUV? Trying to skew the argument to Toyota's favor? Okay, then the Toyota Landcruiser gets nowhere near the mileage of a Ford Focus, and therefore Toyota is junk! Take that!
3rd Apr 2007, 12:46
Yes, the EPA ESTIMATES (understand that word?) for the V-6 Explorer are 15/20. If you've ever gone car shopping, you've seen that the ESTIMATES have a range of values, and state that ACTUAL MILEAGE DEPENDS ON CONDITIONS AND DRIVER HABITS. My actual recorded gas mileage happens to be at the high end of that range. I consistently beat the EPA estimates in every vehicle I have ever owned. I've got the slips to prove my mileage, so rave on.
3rd Apr 2007, 12:51
Considering that Honda uses a fraudulent method of calculating horsepower to inflate the ratings of their 160hp V-6 to 240, it wouldn't surprise me if they did use faulty speedometers to inflate mileage as well. The Fit probably has about 45 real horsepower and really gets about 25 mpg.
3rd Apr 2007, 12:52
Actually sir, I drove my Honda for 600 miles one time and it did not run out of gas. I filled up with fuel and still had a lot of gas to go and could have probably made it to 800 miles on the tank... NOT A DEFECTIVE Gauge, but A DEFECTIVE ENGINE THAT RUNS GREAT AND BURNS LITTLE GAS! Sorry, but you cannot make Ford or GM survive with your gas talk, boy!
3rd Apr 2007, 15:52
I own a manual transmission Fit and find the highway revs to be fine as far a noise is concerned. Had the 5th gear been any taller I'd have to downshift on inclines as there's no acceleration power in those cases anyway.
The concern is fuel economy, I'm guessing I might lose a MPG or two by revving a little higher, but at least I'm not having the drivability affected.
Many newer small cars have auto boxes that eek a little better highway economy from their taller gearing, however most likely downshift on any slight incline so that comes with a price.
3rd Apr 2007, 18:49
Considering that a recent test by a reputable automotive magazine got a whopping SEVENTEEN MILES PER GALLON out of a HYBRID Toyota Highlander, I'd say Japanese companies don't have much to brag about regarding mileage. My TRUCK beats that, and it is not a HYBRID.
3rd Apr 2007, 19:58
It's hilarious comments like this that keep me laughing, and coming back for more! "I drove my old beater Honda for 8,000 miles on half a gallon of gas!" Oh, crap! Please, let's hear more, I need the entertainment! Does it convert into an airplane and surfboard as well? I bet it folds up and fits in your pocket, too!
4th Apr 2007, 09:28
Funny another magazine tested the same vehicle and got in the mid-20's in aggressive driving AND they test drove a full size Dodge truck and got EIGHT miles per gallon.
Why people drive these things, hybrid or not, is beyond me.
4th Apr 2007, 09:40
Have you considered the possibility that all of those Toyota's will do better than EPA estimates also?
Sorry, but your '02 Exploder isn't going to get better mileage than any of the v-6 Toyota's, new or old. And yes, it does get better mileage than a v-8 Toyota SUV, only because the Toyota is a v-8.
My 4wd v-6, '98 Tacoma is rated at around 17 city and 19 or 20 highway if I remember correctly, and I get around 22 in town, and have done as well as 25 on the highway if I really feather the gas pedal.
My '93 Tercel was rated at 33 and 35, and I got 38-40 regularly once it broke in, without driving it easily.
I don't know who said the Highlander Hybrid turned in 17 mpg, but that is a load of BS. No way.
4th Apr 2007, 09:40
Sorry, but why would Honda lie about horsepower? People would test drive the cars anyway and find out any "deficit". Plus, horsepower really means nothing as you need to factor in other things like torque, weight, etc. The Hummer H3 has 230+ hp yet goes 0 - 60 in the same time as the Fit.
As for your claim about MPG, that comes from the EPA, not the manufacturer.
Or are you another person that thinks the EPA is controlled by the Japanese?
4th Apr 2007, 11:24
I have had the car for over 50,000 miles and I do not appreciate you trying to make me look like a fool. I once owned GM cars and never again. My Honda now has over 250,000 miles of trouble free experiences. Thank you and Good night!
4th Apr 2007, 13:40
You know what, I've been here arguing in defense of Honda, but that gas mileage comment WAS pretty funny. Listen, to whoever wrote that: even if you fill your Civic until gas comes out of the filler neck and drive it until you completely run out of gas, you're not going to get much more than 400 miles to a tank of gas on the highway.
If a car has a 10 or 11 gallon tank, and you drive 800 miles, that's about EIGHTY miles per gallon you say your car gets. Civics, and Honda's in general, are the best cars on the road, and the gas mileage is great, but not that great.
4th Apr 2007, 13:45
12:51 When a Fit gets around 350-400 miles out of 10 or 11 gallons of gas, that computes to around 38 or 40 mpg highway. And the Fit may be small and fairly light, but I'm quite sure it wouldn't do 0-60 in the 9 seconds that it does if it had 45 horsepower.
6th Apr 2007, 06:55
"Sorry, but your '02 Exploder isn't going to get better mileage than any of the v-6 Toyota's, new or old. "
Really? You know that for a fact, do you? Alright, now you've got me curious. I happen to have a newer Explorer, and we'll see what the absolute best mileage I can get really is and report back.
9th Apr 2007, 19:18
Actually, Honda has now admitted that their speedometers ARE off by a huge factor. They have LONG ADMITTED using a "different" method of calculating horsepower that grossly inflates the figures. I DID test drive an Accord that had 240 ADVERTISED horsepower and wondered why it was SLOWER than the Fusion I drove that had LESS advertised horsepower.
10th Apr 2007, 08:49
Lots of things affect a car's performance including weight, gearing, options, and so on.
But, of course, your "feel" does not jive with reality.
Here is a direct quote from Edmunds:
"However, the Fusion has the only six-speed automatic in its class, and the transmission performed beautifully with nicely matched shifts and smooth operation. In acceleration trials, the Fusion still lagged slightly behind the pack, with an 8-second 0-60 time and a 15.8-second quarter-mile run. In a recent comparison test, a V6-powered Accord and Camry both ran 0-60 in about 7.5 seconds."