Quote:
Originally Posted by Sigh-on-Rice
Yes, you're correct. There aren't enough results for FR-S/BRZ yet. Only about 60 results so far. But there are almost 300 CR-Z's and that to me is a good sampling. According to EPA, CR-Z's AT gets better MPG, but according to fuelly.com, CR-Z's MT gets better MPG. FR-S/BRZ is getting similar result as CR-Z. These makes me think that EPA test has some disadvantages to these cars and I wanted to mention that so that people stop trusting EPA and automatically think that AT gets better real life MPG than MT.
|
It does have a difference (I won't call it a disadvantage cause it really isn't), it tests both transmissions equally, as I pointed out though a lot of people get an AT because they drive in a lot of stop and go traffic, that's going to skew the numbers in favor of the MT in comparisons like fuelly because stop and go traffic will significantly lower your fuel economy, if you were to put an MT in those same stop and go situations it would be noticeably worse than the AT. I can guaranty that the percentage of AT's that a regularly driven in stop and go traffic is significantly higher than the MT's.
The only way to get a more accurate comparison of which gets better fuel economy, the AT or MT is to get an MT and AT drive both cars at the same time on the same several thousand mile road trip, filling up at all the same stops, stopping at the same lights, accelerating at the same rate, sitting in the same traffic, etc, and if you did that I would be the difference between the two would be the same as the EPA numbers with in a few percentage margin of error.
Something like fuelly will never give you a fair comparison no matter how large the sample size as people by AT's and MT's for different reasons and the cars are not going to be subjected to similar driving situations the majority of the time.