[avalonandl]

Originally Posted by jeep_junkie

I think it's the automatics getting economy numbers near 30 mpg. I suppose 28 is good enough for me. About the same as my 1994 LT1.

I agree- it's the AFM doing that for them. My M6 will get 25 mpg flat terrain at 80 mph. At 72 mpg its about 27 mpg.... weird.

[6spdhyperblue]

Originally Posted by jeep_junkie

I think it's the automatics getting economy numbers near 30 mpg. I suppose 28 is good enough for me. About the same as my 1994 LT1.

There’s no way the 1994 lt1 is getting as much mpg as these. The 6th gen is def rated for more mpg

[jeep_junkie]

Originally Posted by Nicul15

There’s no way the 1994 lt1 is getting as much mpg as these. The 6th gen is def rated for more mpg

You can say the 6th gen is "rated" for more mpg than the previous LT1 all day long, but unless you have actually compared the two, it's just your opinion. I have actually had two 1994 LT1 Trans Ams, both 6 speed, and both returned right at 28 mpg at 80 mph cruise. One of them even broke 30 mpg on a drive from Los Angeles to Santa Rosa, NM. I suppose the thinner air at the elevation of the Continental divide helped. Both cars also got 17 mpg in city traffic in the summer, dipping to 15 in the winter. The previous LT1s were extra sensitive to cold air. The new LT1 is a bigger motor pushing a heavier car and it has a propensity to guzzle fast when under load.

[FrostySS]

At 60MPH on a complete flat road with cruise control on the instant MPG will show 32-34, that's with AFM turned off.

Now of course as soon as I hit the go pedal the MPG drops faster than a $5 hooker lol

[jeep_junkie]

Originally Posted by FrostySS

At 60MPH on a complete flat road with cruise control on the instant MPG will show 32-34, that's with AFM turned off.

Now of course as soon as I hit the go pedal the MPG drops faster than a $5 hooker lol

I wonder if the autos have different air:fuel tables. My instant MPG doesn't exceed 28 unless on a very slight downhill grade or coasting.

[MATTHEWLONG]

On my A8 I also get over well over 30 all the time on a flat 70-80 journey. I am at about 34 MPG on my best 50 at the moment.

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by Nicul15

There’s no way the 1994 lt1 is getting as much mpg as these. The 6th gen is def rated for more mpg

You gotta realize the 4th Gens are much lighter cars, more aerodynamic and have about half a liter less displacement to feed than the 6.2 ...regardless of how much technology we throw at a car, there's a point where you just can't overcome the laws of physics.

When I had a 01 Z28 (LS1 motor) I was getting 30 MPG at 80 MPH and to this date still have proof of it too. Albeit some people called that car a freak car... it still happened. That car got better fuel mileage than my current 2SS. But my 99 Z28 is worse than both.

Originally Posted by MATTHEWLONG

On my A8 I also get over well over 30 all the time on a flat 70-80 journey. I am at about 34 MPG on my best 50 at the moment.

I have an A8. On flat terrain, cruise set...28 MPG is the max it will do with the average on the highway being between 23 and 25.

[mdhopt36]

"Best 400 - 27.8, current 19"
*********

This as well, last 380 miles, 28mpg.
about 4500 on the car. average speed usually 30-35mph.
I've checked the display against actual between fillups 3-4 times, and the display is right on the nose.
Best dropping down to the flatlanders, I got 33.6. returning, it will get 26-27 approximately---all in an area sprinkled with small towns connected by highways, somewhat hilly.

[VJChevelle67]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

You gotta realize the 4th Gens are much lighter cars, more aerodynamic and have about half a liter less displacement to feed than the 6.2 ...regardless of how much technology we throw at a car, there's a point where you just can't overcome the laws of physics.

When I had a 01 Z28 (LS1 motor) I was getting 30 MPG at 80 MPH and to this date still have proof of it too. Albeit some people called that car a freak car... it still happened. That car got better fuel mileage than my current 2SS. But my 99 Z28 is worse than both.



I have an A8. On flat terrain, cruise set...28 MPG is the max it will do with the average on the highway being between 23 and 25.

Hi just got back from a trip. We drove from Steinbach MB Canada to Deadwood SD. Speed was between 60 and 75 miles an hour with a few spots around 40 ish road construction . We got average of about 30.1 mpg not much of a wind and with the top down most of the way other then when it was raining for 40 miles near Bismarck ND . We drive a 2016 mosaic black SS Convertible The drive is a combo of up and down hills. Great scenery

[VJChevelle67]

Just a few pics of our time in the Badlands. If you have never been I recommend all car and driver enthusiast to take the winding twisting hill climbing Beauty the area is full of

[avalonandl]

Last tank: 25.6 on the meter 24.8 actual- highway cruising for 90%

[vtirocz]

Originally Posted by avalonandl

I agree- it's the AFM doing that for them. My M6 will get 25 mpg flat terrain at 80 mph. At 72 mpg its about 27 mpg.... weird.

Originally Posted by Nicul15

There’s no way the 1994 lt1 is getting as much mpg as these. The 6th gen is def rated for more mpg

Originally Posted by jeep_junkie

You can say the 6th gen is "rated" for more mpg than the previous LT1 all day long, but unless you have actually compared the two, it's just your opinion. I have actually had two 1994 LT1 Trans Ams, both 6 speed, and both returned right at 28 mpg at 80 mph cruise. One of them even broke 30 mpg on a drive from Los Angeles to Santa Rosa, NM. I suppose the thinner air at the elevation of the Continental divide helped. Both cars also got 17 mpg in city traffic in the summer, dipping to 15 in the winter. The previous LT1s were extra sensitive to cold air. The new LT1 is a bigger motor pushing a heavier car and it has a propensity to guzzle fast when under load.

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

You gotta realize the 4th Gens are much lighter cars, more aerodynamic and have about half a liter less displacement to feed than the 6.2 ...regardless of how much technology we throw at a car, there's a point where you just can't overcome the laws of physics.

When I had a 01 Z28 (LS1 motor) I was getting 30 MPG at 80 MPH and to this date still have proof of it too. Albeit some people called that car a freak car... it still happened. That car got better fuel mileage than my current 2SS. But my 99 Z28 is worse than both.

I have an A8. On flat terrain, cruise set...28 MPG is the max it will do with the average on the highway being between 23 and 25.

I had a '00 Z28 M6 for 12 years and can confirm that car got every bit as good of fuel economy as my '17 SS M6. The Z28 could get between 29-30 full tank averages on long highway trips, even with the AC on, passenger, and luggage.

My '17SS did get a best of 31.2mpg (50 mile ave, based on the display), but tank average was high 20's on the recent highway trip to CamaroFest. https://www.camaro6.com/forums/showp...0&postcount=57

Also, for what it's worth, the manual trans gear ratios are identical between the '00 Z28 and '17 SS. The 0.5:1 6th gear is a big reason for why the highway fuel economy was so good.

[Emoto]

I just came back from a road trip from SE MA to western CT and back. 2SS A8, 15k miles, A/C on.

My best 50 mile average (according to the display) was 32.2! I love this car!

[sgnilleh]

I average about 11-13mpg, but I am in "city" driving 99% of the time and I often drive as if I was wanted to just burn piles of money at the gas pump. I've had the car for about 3 months now, and it's just too fun to not heavy foot out of any light or stop sight. I consider the gas pricetag it a justified cost.