View Single Post
Old 02-11-2013, 03:39 PM   #75
Allch Chcar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Drives: N/A
Location: N/A
Posts: 3,380
Thanks: 2,205
Thanked 646 Times in 419 Posts
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by naikaidriver View Post
Yes, mileage can vary wildly between drivers, habits, gas, conditions, ect. but the earlier point that the EPA has agreed to is that in the case of the FRS/BRZ/GT86, in testing the AT gets better mileage.

Anyone who has spent any kind of time around cars knows that this is as surprising as it is counterintuitive but unless someone is ready to stand up and call B.S. to the manufacturer and testing agencies, his statement stands.

Scott
AT numbers have been doing better than MT numbers on the EPA "test" for years thanks to programming specifically for the test. Manufacturers can either program for the numbers or they can program for the real world. It's pretty well known to be a bunch of .

As for the Twins, MT and AT are getting similar numbers under real world conditions, despite the AT having better gearing. Nothing new here.
__________________
-Allch Chcar

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragonitti View Post
Daily Driver, occasional weekend drifter.
Allch Chcar is offline   Reply With Quote