Quote:
Originally Posted by Sigh-on-Rice
Yes, it's entirely based on the way people drive if you compare one against another. But if it's comparing 10 against 10, or even 100 against 100, it's not about how a single person drives.
I agree that if you were to compare MPG at 60 mph cruising, AT will be better. I'm just mentioning the real life MPG in fuelly.com. I'm not saying that's 100% true. Just mentioning the results in fuelly.com.
|
You don't however have a good sampling of the two there, right now the number of cars is to low to get any sort of real average sample, plus given that 75% of the cars made have been manual the AT is going to be skewed in comparison for quite a while.
While I don't bother using fuelly to track my car I do still track it and I'm averaging 33.3MPG thus far with about 2400 miles, and I've gotten over 40 on long highway trips, and I will point out that most of the time I drive fairly normally and with cruise control on on the highway, i'm not one of those idiots who weaves in and out of traffic.
Also just another thought for those results being skewed, often people choose an AT over an MT because they sit in stop and go traffic a lot, which means a lot of the AT's are going to come in with lower MPG because of that as well.
Really I would put little faith in getting an accurate comparison on that site or any site like that for those reasons alone, the only way you'll get a accurate comparison is under with real empirical data of two cars AT and MT driven under identical circumstances till a sizable enough data set is collected...... which is actually where the EPA fuel economy numbers come from, while they they may not match exactly to real world numbers it's the closest thing you'll get to comparing the difference between two different cars under identical circumstances and thus which car is capable of the highest fuel economy all other things being equal.