What are the hypermile "sleepers"

[red91sit]

Buick was certainly doing something right around the turn of the decade. The series 1 3800 in the '92 up lesabres got excellent highway gas mileage considering its great heft. 30 MPG highway is about average, which is amazing if you have ever driven one of these boats. I think some of the big advantages on this car is the curve aruond winshield. It should prevent most of the typical A pillar buffeting as well as the ridiculously undersized side view mirrors. They are absolutly useless.

On a side note, even though this car is huge and gets good highway mileage... I ABSOLUTLEY HATE IT

Originally Posted by MTUboi86

I've got a 1993 Buick Century with the 3300 (3.3L) V6. [NOT a 3.1L that started in 1994]
On highway trips (70mph) I always get above 30mpg. Going 55mph I usually get around 33mpg. I've gotten up to 38.4mpg on the highway (between 55 and 70mph). This is with cruise control and no hypermilling techniques.

In the city I usually get 17mpg, but that's cuz I tend to drive it like a sports car in the city ... cuz it has the power. Haven't attempted any hypermilling techniques to improve that yet. I will next summer though, once I get it un-stored from this winter.

I haven't heard anyone with a 3.1L in one of these cars (B. Centuries, O. Cierra, etc) that have similar body styles getting this good of gas mileage on the highway.

The four-cylinder engines put into this car actually get WORSE gas mileage than the V6.

[DarbyWalters]

I had a 1974 Subaru GL 2 door back in 1976. I drove it like I stole it and would consistently get 32+ from the 1400 cc. I actually liked that little green monster with a hlaf black vinyl top.

[yaris0128]

89-92 Ford Probes. I had an 89 GT turbo and I averaged between 31-35mpg out of that car. For a car that keeps up with todays sports cars thats just amazing. Its aerodynamics really help it slice through the air and with the bugs. Rare you'll be cleaing up any dead bugs on that grill.

[fowljesse]

1 vote for the Mazda MX-3. I have read about many people who exceeded 40mpg in the 4 cyl model without knowing anything about hypermiling. I think I could get 50mpg in one with some cheap mods, and driving technique.
My stock V6 model with only a K&N intake got 35mpg, and stays at about 32mpg city, with some highway. My MX-3 with 2X the HP of the stock V6 gets the same mileage, for now, and will get better than 35 soon.

[bowtieguy]

i read yesterday that the mazda2(1.5 liter) is coming to the US soon. and a diesel model is due here by 2012--wow!...possibly 4 door only, however.

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2010...-2011-mazda-2/

[trollbait]

Not surprising about the Mazda2. It shares the platform with the new Fiesta. It will interesting to see the differences in performance between the two, and how things develope now that Ford no longer has a majority in Mazda.

[occupant]

The EPA ratings out for the 2011 Mazda2 are lower than that of the Fiesta. Possible the 2 does get the 40mpg but they're playing it safe? IDK...

My vote for this thread is any 1993-2002 Mitsubishi Mirage, or 1993-1996 Dodge Colt, Eagle Summit, and Plymouth Colt coupes with the 1.5L engine and the 5-speed. EPA ratings were 32/40 when new (28/36 on the new cycle estimate). The coupes are pretty slick, especially the 1993-1996 models, and I like the interiors and the seats. A friend of mine has a 1.8L 1994 Summit ES version and he gets 20mpg out of it because he flogs it all the time, it hasn't been maintained, and he has stupid wheels and rubber band tires on it.

Also I had a 1986 Mercury Lynx with the carbureted 1.9L engine, 108K miles, and a 4-speed manual I bought from an impound auction in 1994. I got 40mpg out of that while I taught myself to drive standard with it at age 16. I also liked to floor it 0-30mph in first, dump the clutch, listen to it backfire through the bad muffler, then accelerate normally in 4th from 30 up to 45-50 or whatever the speed limit was. Didn't have an adverse effect on economy that I could tell, and it sounded cool to me.

[Wazabi Owner]

I am building a '93 Toyota Paseo. Hoping it'll turn out to be a sleeper. It is an automatic so I'm hoping for the best. Should hopefully have it done in 2 weeks. Got the initial tear-down of the engine done to check specs and ordered a rebuild kit so T-Day week I should be building the motor and installing the following weekend.

[trollbait]

The EPA ratings out for the 2011 Mazda2 are lower than that of the Fiesta. Possible the 2 does get the 40mpg but they're playing it safe? IDK..

It's city rating is 1 higher, and the combined is the same. It's possible it has different gearing, but it could just be normal variation in test results. As expected the double clutch six speed in the Ford does better than the classic 4 speed auto. I wonder amenable it is to advanced hypermiling.

I don't get how the SFE Fiesta can have the same combined fuel economy while getting 2 mpg more highway.

I once had a Mirage rental for a day. Liked what I saw of it during that time, but I'd don't remember being in anything so stripped. New base Kia's have more luxurious interiors.

[RandyF]

How about my 2011 335d? Flat 55mph, no wind to speak of, and I'm showing (haven't even been through my 1st 1/4 of a tank yet) 45-50mpg on the fuel economy gauge... we'll see. I'm managing to squeak ~19mpg out of my wife's 2010 Tahoe Z71 commuting 80% freeway 20% city, which I think is pretty good for the big beast. I just traded my 2010 Tundra DoubleCab Rock Warrior (13.8-15.6mpg) in on the BMW, and so far (only owned it for about 7hrs now, lol!) I'm extremely happy. 425 pound-feet of torque... 0-60 5.9sec... 36 rated highway mpg... what's not to love?

[imzjustplayin]

Originally Posted by trollbait

It's city rating is 1 higher, and the combined is the same. It's possible it has different gearing, but it could just be normal variation in test results. As expected the double clutch six speed in the Ford does better than the classic 4 speed auto. I wonder amenable it is to advanced hypermiling.

I don't get how the SFE Fiesta can have the same combined fuel economy while getting 2 mpg more highway.

I once had a Mirage rental for a day. Liked what I saw of it during that time, but I'd don't remember being in anything so stripped. New base Kia's have more luxurious interiors.

Uh, they're different cars?? Did you happen to miss the part about the Mazda has a 1.5L while the Fiesta has a 1.6L? Transmission is different, engine is different, size is different, it's a different car! Similar styling and same platform, but they're really different cars.. This isn't a total rebadge like the Corolla/Prizm, these are substantially different cars.. I guess since they share the same platform, having similar fuel economy isn't a surprise but they're definitely different vehicles.

[02SaturnSL]

I have currently: 1995 Honda CB250 (16Kmiles)- 75mpg, sometimes more. 2007 Honda VT750C2(8k miles) - 50mpg on the nose
2002 Saturn SL (208K miles) - 40's, highest 49mpg did it twice.
2011 Dodge Challenger SE(2K miles) - new, sticker says 27 highway, can get 31.x on the highway @ 60 with cruise on.

Driver controls alot of the mpg, get a scangauge and slow down on the hwy!!

[LTBrink]

I used to get 30-32 mpg out of my 1995 Firebird Formula at 70 MPH.

[occupant]

Originally Posted by MTUboi86

I've got a 1993 Buick Century with the 3300 (3.3L) V6...the four-cylinder engines put into this car actually get WORSE gas mileage than the V6.

I came back to this thread because somehow I missed this post.

We'll have to agree to disagree here. I've owned most of the various powertrain combos available in the A-body. 2.2/3T40, 2.5/3T40, 2.8/4T60, 3.1/4T60, 3.3/3T40 for sure. Let's stick to those. I haven't had the 3.3/4T60 or the 2.8/3T40 or anything 3.0/3.8 gas or 4.3 diesel powered.

The 2.2/3-speed Century I had was EPA rated 25 city 32 highway when new on the window sticker. From 224K to 270K that's what I got, then the TCC solenoid started sticking. So I had to unplug that and I got 25, no better, city or highway until I traded it in. Had I known it was such a simple, don't have to remove the transmission fix, I would have had it done and kept that car.

The 2.5/3-speed Celebrities (three of them), Century, and Ciera I owned all got low 20s in town and 30 on the highway. Not one of these cars cost me more than $300.

The 2.8/4-speed Celebrity I had suffered from severe electrical gremlins and averaged about 18mpg in mixed driving, and one highway trip when I taped some ECU wires together to make the AC work and speedo work and stay in closed loop I got 26mpg on a 600 mile round trip. That's about equal to the original EPA ratings of 20/27 when you think about it. And it was a $400 POS.

The 3.1/4-speed Ciera I have now hasn't been driven enough to test mileage. I expect it to meet the original 19/29 EPA ratings and I hope to better them by 20-40% based on my driving habits.

The 3.3/3-speed Century I owned could not meet the EPA highway ratings of 27 (I got 24 on the trip home from PA to TX) but I did manage to get 20 mixed out of it once it was here. It was a $250 beater so I didn't expect much.

I can say it is easier, FOR ME, to get the EPA ratings or better out of a 4-cylinder A-body than a V6 one. I'll be testing that theory thoroughly with this 1995 Ciera, though, and once the 3.1L is worn out I'm putting a four in it, be that a pushrod 2.2 like it could have had new (and was in my Century that did so well) or an Ecotec if I can work out the wiring and computers.

[theholycow]

Originally Posted by occupant

once the 3.1L is worn out

That shouldn't take too long, in my experience. Of all the great engines GM has made, why did I end up with that awful 3.1? That was a lot of years ago and that car is long gone but I keep being reminded of it, like last year when the 3.1 in my friend's Malibu needed intake and head gaskets and the fuel injectors/fuel rail were a huge pain.

[LTBrink]

I suspect my new 420hp 5.0 Mustang has the potential to break 30 MPG or more. I will get a tuner and start tweaking the map.