[MovieGuy]

Originally Posted by Heavymetal454

It's a Camaro. It's supposed to ruin the environment. I hear the Tesla might be better or possibly the Volt. Smh

I was just thinking if a person is that concerned about mileage they should have bought a Prius. That way they could rest well knowing it only took strip mining to provide the lithium to power their car, and don't let that hazardous waste bugaboo when the batteries are spent bother you. Or a nice KIA would be economical.

Camaros are supposed to be stylish and fun.

[MikeT]

The things is, folks, when you're talking about gasoline-powered cars, you can have a monster-fast engine with a great 0-to-60 time and a lot of torque. Or you can have an engine that gets great CITY fuel economy. But you can't have both.

Show me a 4, 6 or 8 cylinder engine with a 0-60 time in the 4 or 5 second range that gets good real-world CITY fuel economy. No such animal. I'm not talking about numbers on the window sticker. I'm talking about the real world. Read BMW messageboards. Read Ford messageboards. Read Porsche forums. Those forums are littered with folks whining that their turbo I6 or V8 is getting city mpg in the teens. It's just reality. It's a trade-off. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

[SuperSound]

Originally Posted by MovieGuy

I was just thinking if a person is that concerned about mileage they should have bought a Prius. That way they could rest well knowing it only took strip mining to provide the lithium to power their car, and don't let that hazardous waste bugaboo when the batteries are spent bother you. Or a nice KIA would be economical.

Camaros are supposed to be stylish and fun.

There's buying a car for economy and trying to "get economy" out of a car. Nothing wrong with either. Most of these threads are people concerned there is something wrong with the car because they expected better MPG. Don't think anyone "driving the car like it should be" complains.

Originally Posted by MikeT

Show me a 4, 6 or 8 cylinder engine with a 0-60 time in the 4 or 5 second range that gets good real-world CITY fuel economy. No such animal. I'm not talking about numbers on the window sticker. I'm talking about the real world. Read BMW messageboards. Read Ford messageboards. Read Porsche forums. Those forums are littered with folks whining that their turbo I6 or V8 is getting city mpg in the teens. It's just reality. It's a trade-off. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Many people forget that turbo cars are more susceptible to your throttle behavior than a NA car. See it with every turbo car like you mentioned.

[MrChrisLS3]

Originally Posted by MovieGuy

I was just thinking if a person is that concerned about mileage they should have bought a Prius. That way they could rest well knowing it only took strip mining to provide the lithium to power their car, and don't let that hazardous waste bugaboo when the batteries are spent bother you. Or a nice KIA would be economical.

Camaros are supposed to be stylish and fun.

it's not always concern about spending money at the pump as it is performance. If the engine has an issue, an unusually low MPG may be the first tell tale before the MIL kicks on.

[angelbones]

Originally Posted by MikeT

The things is, folks, when you're talking about gasoline-powered cars, you can have a monster-fast engine with a great 0-to-60 time and a lot of torque. Or you can have an engine that gets great CITY fuel economy. But you can't have both.

Show me a 4, 6 or 8 cylinder engine with a 0-60 time in the 4 or 5 second range that gets good real-world CITY fuel economy. No such animal. I'm not talking about numbers on the window sticker. I'm talking about the real world. Read BMW messageboards. Read Ford messageboards. Read Porsche forums. Those forums are littered with folks whining that their turbo I6 or V8 is getting city mpg in the teens. It's just reality. It's a trade-off. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Actually my BMW 228 gets about 22 mpg of hard city driving/ 26 mpg combined, and C&D puts it 0-60 at 4.9 secs, and I suppose I could pull off a 5.2 seconds myself without trying too hard. (Btw, took a trip in it and was getting about 36 mpg highway) The M235 EPA is 21 mpg city and it does 4.4 seconds 0-60. So, you can have cake and eat it too. That said, I still think the Camaro has better bang for the buck, because option lists on a Bimmer can get out of hand.

[MovieGuy]

Originally Posted by MrChrisLS3

it's not always concern about spending money at the pump as it is performance. If the engine has an issue, an unusually low MPG may be the first tell tale before the MIL kicks on.

You have a valid point. However 15 mpg is not that far under the EPA estimate of 18 city. If the OP had read his window sticker he bought the car with his eyes open. Gas mileage generally improves after the first 1500 miles or so also.

[MrChrisLS3]

Originally Posted by MovieGuy

You have a valid point. However 15 mpg is not that far under the EPA estimate of 18 city. If the OP had read his window sticker he bought the car with his eyes open. Gas mileage generally improves after the first 1500 miles or so also.

I agree that his mileage isn't that far off, if at all. Just wanted to point out there was more than one reason to be observant of fuel efficiency.