Quote:
Originally Posted by sycamore
I love my Cobalt...it has everything I want, and is perfect for me.
|
One who only drove Model Ts would love a 2008 Model T. That is the point. You were driving GM products. Therefore any GM product that is only 10 years obsolete would be a major improvement.
Quote:
1997 Honda Accord 4 cyl 5-spd: 22/29
1996 Honda Accord 4 cyl 5-spd: 22/29
1997 Chevrolet Lumina 6 cyl 4-spd: 18/26
1996 Chevrolet Lumina 6 cyl 4-spd: 18/26
|
Return to previously posts facts. GM optimizes their vehicles for EPA mileage testing. Ie. Corvette that would change engine parameters and bypass second gear during EPA tests. I never got 26 MPG out of that Pontiac (Lumina equivalent) doing only highway driving. But then no one should have expected GM cars to achieve those EPA numbers. Look at the numbers. These were only 52 HP/liter engines.
EPA numbers for a 1997 Honda were posted. Actual driving numbers for that 5 speed Honda Accord (now more than 10 years old) were 36 and 38 MPG. Why? Hondas are not optimized for EPA mileage testing. Hondas are designed by car guys - the people who innovate. Therefore that Honda EPA rated at only 29 MPG highway routinely does over 30 MPG local AND 36-38 during a trip of nothing but highway driving.
You bragged about a 2008 Cobalt doing 40. A 10 year old Accord - a much heavier and older car - did almost as good because it was not a GM product.
Facts and numbers were posted repeatedly and previous for Sycamore. So again, you post numbers that contradicts what you have posted. The Honda (designed by car guys) is rated only for 29 and did consecutive tanks of 36 and 38 MPG. If I say it enough times, will Sycamore finally understand it? GM products did achieve their EPA highway figures. GM is a major contributor to high oil prices.
Sycamore - welcome to Summer school. You did not learn when these concepts posted month ago. Back when you were praising the poorly regarded (10 year obsolete) GM J-car (or whatever they now call it). This only repeats what Sycamore did not read previously. Energy prices must increase radically. Why? People such as Sycamore would praise GM and buy their crap products. GM - a company that openly advocated low mileage cars - refused to let car guys innovate if not required by government regulation. The US government gave $100million in 1994 to build a hybrid. No hybrid in 2008 and no plans in the innovation pipeline? But Sycamore still praises GM products. Another reason why gas prices must keep increasing. Add Sycamore to the list. He does not even grasp numbers: a patriotic car (now more than 10 years old) rated 29 MPG highway achieved consecutive tanks of 36 to 38 in the real world. GM ran to the government saying this was not possible (just like they did in late 1960s and 1970s).
Ever work in a GM plant. So much of everything. How can GM be worth so little. View GM product designs such as the Cobalt, their pickups, and SUVs. Explains why America consumes twice as much energy per person. It also explains why the American standards of living may be the next victim. Even Sun Microsystems is worth more than GM.
Lessons from the 1970s. Meat prices will double. Massive inflation will finally appear even on spread sheets as jobs are lost. Companies must be sold to foreigners (ie Hershey, Anhauser Busch). Too many would praise and buy GM rather than support free market principles - buy the best. Add Sycamore to a list of why oil prices must increase.