Weyrman
New member
I hear ya! I went to turn in my Suburban for a new one a couple years ago during the "cash for clunkers" sweepstakes. One like I have was nearly $60k and got only 1 mile per gallon better mileage. I might have gotten better than that because I drive conservatively. But I couldn't justify saving a couple mpg for $60k.
How you drive plays an enormous part in your vehicle's miles per gallon averages. You can easily beat the published mpg charts if you try.
Occasionally I like to have fun and push the limits. But mostly I manage to contain myself and achieve some reasonably decent miles per gallon figures.
My mpg averages...
'99 Sebring - 33 mpg hiway and 29 mpg city
'67 Sunbeam Alpine - 35+ mpg - dual twin carb - fun
'67 Sunbeam Alpine - 45+ mpg - single carb - pedestrian
'96 BWM Z3 - 30 mpg city, 35 mpg hiway
'66 Mustang - 25 mpg - pedestrian, 15 mpg - fun
'93 Suburban 4x4 - 12 mpg city, 19 mpg hiway (will go 700+ miles on a tank on the open road. But it's a 42 gallon tank.)
'94 Camry - 30+ mpg
'87 Honda 700 F2 Interceptor - 45 mpg (50+ if I don't get on it)
Keeping the vehicle tuned up makes a big difference in emissions. I try to do so. I put a special California style catilitic converter on the Suburban. Did all the usual tune up stuff and went for the emmissions test last year.
Since it’s an old model they put it on the dyno and ran it through the test. The operator started it up and began the test sequence. But after the initial run up to speed the system shut down. He reset it and went through the procedure again with the same result three times. He got out of the Suburban and checked the computer. He shook his head and said he’d never seen this before. The Suburban had passed each time in just the first few moments of the test.
That tells me there are a lot of folks out there that don't take care of their vehicles. And that equates to a lot of unnecessary emissions.
