why are our cars so bad on gas?
#1
why are our cars so bad on gas?
Why is the impreza so bad? I know the boxer layout and permanent 4 wheel drive don't help but let's face it we must be competing with some supercars and 8 cylinder cars as far as mpg goes.
#4
more to the point if you are so thick you cannot work out why a fifteen year year old technology permanent four wheel drive turbo charged car uses more fuel than a new lightweight haldex 4wd system car with stop start technology etc. then you really do have special needs
#5
I said the 4wd systems partly to blame but the semetrical layout must be eficent by design and the car is not overly heavy. Aero is not great esp on a blob sti. But the answer to my question must lie in the engine
#6
ill post anywhere i like thanks.
more to the point if you are so thick you cannot work out why a fifteen year year old technology permanent four wheel drive turbo charged car uses more fuel than a new lightweight haldex 4wd system car with stop start technology etc. then you really do have special needs
more to the point if you are so thick you cannot work out why a fifteen year year old technology permanent four wheel drive turbo charged car uses more fuel than a new lightweight haldex 4wd system car with stop start technology etc. then you really do have special needs
#7
Responses like this is the reason that I'm on Scoobynet less and less these days.
OP, it's accumulative. As you said four wheel drive doesn't help but the engines are not the most efficient. I had a non turbo back in 1999 and that was poor too, getting low 30's on a long run. My Type R only gets mid 20's taking it easy and pushing on a bit into the low teens.
OP, it's accumulative. As you said four wheel drive doesn't help but the engines are not the most efficient. I had a non turbo back in 1999 and that was poor too, getting low 30's on a long run. My Type R only gets mid 20's taking it easy and pushing on a bit into the low teens.
Trending Topics
#9
Can't comment on gas mpg as I run my car on petrol and not LPG. But certainly on petrol I don't find it and at all, 27mpg in the summer, 25mpg in the winter and 30+ on a run. Really can't complain
#10
The pedal on the right adds fuel, the more you press it down to the floor the worse mpg gets,
In all seriousness though, if youve ever tried to push a scoob by hand youll realise how much drag the 4x4 has, couple that with a 2.0 turbo charged engine, dont be fooled by the new engines, ive had 3 2.0tfsi in various guises and not one has done close to 30mpg round town, if you want fast with good mpg took at hybrids
In all seriousness though, if youve ever tried to push a scoob by hand youll realise how much drag the 4x4 has, couple that with a 2.0 turbo charged engine, dont be fooled by the new engines, ive had 3 2.0tfsi in various guises and not one has done close to 30mpg round town, if you want fast with good mpg took at hybrids
#12
Newage WRX is good on fuel for a performance 4x4 that's still pretty heavy.
30mpg stock (official figures) and as high as 38mpg after tuning.
Now the STI. Avoid. Heavy Gearbox saps most of the power making the car much slower and thirstier than the WRX.
30mpg stock (official figures) and as high as 38mpg after tuning.
Now the STI. Avoid. Heavy Gearbox saps most of the power making the car much slower and thirstier than the WRX.
#13
18 June 1815 - Waterloo
iTrader: (31)
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 19,156
Likes: 14
From: To the valley men!
The UK is only a very small part of the Subaru market hence the lack of investment. The US and Asian markets are the main areas but Subaru did not invest in diesel tech as much as the other car makers. Diesel sales account for less than 3% of the JDM market and is likely to decline, Nissan use French diesels.
If you believe all modern performance cars are fuel efficient then you have swallowed the advertisers spin or don't read the reviews properly. Haldex and many of the other 4x4 systems are torque vectoring or electronically controlled, so not true AWD like Subaru hence the fuel efficiency.
Until the DI engines are introduced then either buy another car or suck up the low MPG.
#14
#17
And meanwhile in reality...
#18
Anyone wanna swap their WRX for my STi? Cash your way too
#20
Does anyone remember jackanory...::...
#22
#24
WRX owner: WRX is faster to 60
STI fanboys: No it ******* isn't you w4nker
STI owners after facts: Yes it's the gearing
WRX owner: WRX manages 30-38mpg dependent of tune. (STI 18-25mpg)
STI fanboys: No it ******* doesn't you w4nker
STI owners after facts and many links to WRX owners confirming the manufacturers claimed 30mpg.....
STI fanboys: No it ******* isn't you w4nker
STI owners after facts: Yes it's the gearing
WRX owner: WRX manages 30-38mpg dependent of tune. (STI 18-25mpg)
STI fanboys: No it ******* doesn't you w4nker
STI owners after facts and many links to WRX owners confirming the manufacturers claimed 30mpg.....
#25
Love how he acknowledges the WRX is faster than the STI. He must think it's the extra drag, curb weight, extra transmission losses or gear ratios though.
I know, it must be hard for the STI fanboys, not only is their car **** slow it's also far inferior on fuel to the significantly more efficient WRX.
Hmm, slower, stronger box and crap on fuel. There's times I think STI fanboys should by a tractor.
Hmm, slower, stronger box and crap on fuel. There's times I think STI fanboys should by a tractor.
Last edited by RS_Matt; 11 October 2015 at 10:54 AM.
#29
#30
I doubt it's purely STi owners though. A lot of folk have left the Impreza brand, no doubt mainly due to subarus ridiculous prices of new cars and the good ol' 2.5 problems.
I'm still here waiving the flag though.....like the last person left on a battlefield lol
I'm still here waiving the flag though.....like the last person left on a battlefield lol