Quote:
Originally Posted by cpippolo
That might be a reasonable indocator of what to expect, but I'm not sure it translates as well when going from a naturally aspirated engine to a turbo. I agree though that fuel consumption numbers from few users is not overly informative, unless its something like a highway number with the cruise set at 65 for an extended time on flat terrain (gives you an idea of what might be achievable). However, looking at the average from a large group is probably more informative than the EPA numbers that are generated from a very specific protocol that still doesn't really reflect the real world, but it will be a while before we have much of that data.
Maybe the car will be so fantastic I wont care. If that's not the case, might wait a bit.
|
What's achievable is like trying to predict your finish time at the Boston Marathon from the winning time. Same thing with using a large group of averages, you can't predict your mpg by that just as you can't predict your finish time. You need a reference to your specific driving and the best you got is your current car and it's mpg vs the EPA. Turbo car or not shouldn't make a difference here.