The gov't is the military so it is relevant, if mpg is not based on the actual mpg that represents fraud.

 

I've managed to get even better almost double the gas mileage with a manual SL2 from what was on the sticker. It's all in the driving technique not the conspiracy. I will admit it's annoying to drive that way.

There are clubs that drive around trying to get long distances on one tank of gas.... not like that's what they base the sticker mileage on but it does indicate that driving style is very relevant.

I've noticed drivers floor it then brake hard at the next light and do that for every light. I've noticed drivers in rush hour traffic gunning it for 5 feet to catch up to the car doing 65 then break so they could then repeat the action for miles on end.

I'm not saying that anyone is right or wrong just posting my observations and why I think sticker mileage doesn't always work out.

 

Sue the government fm2200, you seems to know everything. One would think you would have known who set the numbers for the gas mileage rating posted on the government required labels.

http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/

 

fm220, did you get that lawsuit for fraud started yet?

 

Oh my....

 

My 94 coupe with automatic regularly gets 33-34 open road, cruise set on 75 with the A/C running on 4 lane roads running through the mountains.
I really don't track city but low 20's sounds about right.
I had a friend with a 5 speed early 2000 that driven the same routes generally got about 10 mpg better.
For a long time I had a 5 speed Mitsubishi that pretty much got the same miliage also.
Well, low 30's on the open road and averaged 29 mpg day in and out for 11 years and 270,000 miles.
I am not unhappy with my 94 Saturn SC2

 

I have a goverment car that used to be in the military and it doesn't get any gas mileage at all. I think the air force did something to the car, maybe they filled it up with agent orange a few times