I agree with you Willy, that does suck. The EPA on the Auto is 19/26 and that is backed down to around 80% for complaint reasons. That would come out to 23.75/32.5.
What the heck kind of logic is that? I don't know of any similar engine setup that gets 32.5 mpg on the highway (GM 3800 V6 nothwithstanding). And what does "complaint reasons" mean? Who would complain to whom for what? Did you just make that up on the spot?
The argument that it is pretty good for a car with 240 hp does not stand up. These are EPA numbers that should mean something.
EPA numbers have been a meaningless joke for years. They don't mean squat. The European urban and extra-urban ratings are far more accurate, but being that we're in the United States, that's a different discussion entirely.
Anyway, e-squared, could you enlighten me on how my 240 horsepower argument is flawed? We're talking about three things here:
* A 3000 pound curb weight;
* A relatively large displacement V6; and,
* A relatively high peak horsepower output.
Those ingredients aren't exactly the recipe for a Geo. Our 2.4 liter 150 horsepower '98 Altima SE averaged around 23 mpg in 80/20 urban driving, while my old 2.0 liter 140 horsepower SE-R scratched out about 24 mpg in the same scenario. Willy's 19 mpg, while on the low end of the scale, hardly seems out of line.