As I said…the two websites I originally went to stated the 6.2 Diesel in the Suburban had a EPA estimate of 16mpg highway…So then Texas pointed out it’s 22mpg.
I was doing a quick calculation estimate in my head…the actual increase is still 40%…But as I said…I don’t doubt you’re wrong…It’s just a red flag when I see numbers like that.
Attached is a chevy ad from 1981, they do actually claim 31 mpg highway. No idea why the official EPA estimates from the fueleconomy.gov archives are so different.
@strongdreamswaithere I tried to invite any of them to take a trip along with me to see just how far 31 gallons will go. But no, none of them are willing to accept it, they just try to prove me wrong. And just so that you know, there are 2 6.2 engine designs. 1 has an 18:1 compression ratio which gets less fuel economy, and the other has 22.5:1. I have the 22.5:1 ratio which… USES LESS FUEL!!! Plus by driving at 55 and not 65 I get better mileage. Also, 1 more thing that helps, not flooring it every time I am on the highway.
Thank you for posting that picture, that again shows there is the possibility of getting 31 mpg out of a suburban. I will do my best to not be rude again.
First off beninsd you’ve only posted anecdotal evidence. You’ve posted no proof what-so-ever. Just that some people some places say they’ve gotten 31mpg.
That’s NOT proof.
I could care less what GM says their mileage estimates are. GM will post numbers for advertising. They can lie all they want…doesn’t mean it’s correct. The EPA estimates are the only true estimates you can rely on.
Based on other much more reliable web-sites then the ONE you posted…
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/1985_GMC_Suburban.shtml
http://www.mpgomatic.com/2008/08/13/diesel-mileage-1985-1987/
http://www.aboutautomobile.com/Fuel/1985/GMC/K15+Suburban+4WD
None of them posted a MPG anywhere near the 35 you said…NOT even close. Most were not even 20mpg. You can rant all you want…the FACT remains that if you’re achieving 31mpg…it’s WELL BEYOND what the EPA and other testers have determined. Why you’re seeing a huge difference is beyond me.
Those 1981 EPA estimates are before several adjustments were made to made to their reported MPGs to make them better match ‘real world’ experience. The oldest numbers I can find that are adjusted to the current methodology is the 22 mpg value for 1984 and 1985. So I bet if we could get an ‘adjusted’ mpg value for 1982 it would also be 22 mpg.
So ‘frankly’, the stats I posted are applicable.
Interestingly, and FWIW, from 1978 through 1983 model years, the EPA only reported a single estimated mileage figure. I don’t know if that was city or combined. They only started reporting city, highway and combined as 3 separate numbers in 1984.
For 1982, the official EPA number for the diesel suburban was 20 MPG (boxed in the ad I posted). The 31 highway MPG number comes only from GM and is not tested by the EPA. And, as noted, the testing method has been revised several times since 1978.
The EPA estimates are the only true estimates you can rely on.
Well…the EPA has very few employees dedicated to automotive testing and they only test about 15% of vehicles each year, and use the automakers’ numbers for the rest anyway.
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/09q3/the_truth_about_epa_city_highway_mpg_estimates-feature
Its amazing how a perfectly stupid thread can go downhill. I just got here and based on the original post, I was going to remark that I would like to see how driver attitude, skill, technique or education is going to make a Hummer match the 38 mpg I get with my Saturn.
The driver has an effect on mileage, but not the biggest effect.
As far as anyone’s claim on the mileage, who are we to say that someone didn’t do it? Now if my Saturn (29 city, 40 highway, original epa estimates) somehow got me 75 mpg, I wouldn’t tell anyone. I have seen a few things in my life that I don’t talk about, not because they are classified national secrets or anything, its just that if I heard the story from someone else, I wouldn’t believe it.
Again, knowing how much fuel I can carry, and knowing that my fuel gauge is correct can indeed tell me how much I have used. In case you didn’t know… They haven’t changed fuel level gauges much in 30 years. The basic technology is the same. The only difference now is that being digital makes the gauge more accurate. That said, instead of knowing how much fuel I have in the tank in 8ths, you can now know how many gallons in the case of the 1999 Cadillac with a Northstar V-8… Or you can know it down to the 32nd of a tank. The truth is, if you know that your gauge is correct, and you are sitting still on level ground, you can certainly do the math to find mileage. It may be rough with up to a .25 mile per gallon error, but I’ll take that .25 mile per gallon error. This is basic math that lets you figure out mileage.
31 gallons divided by 8 = 3.875 gallons per 1/8th tank
3/8ths tank = 11.625 gallons.
add 2 gallons to compensate for the emergency reserve built into the tank…
13.625 gallons
400 miles divided by 13.625 gallons
29.35779816513761 miles per gallon.
It’s kinda funny how I can be really speedy or eggshell pedal my car, I still get pretty much the same MPG regardless of how I drive my car. If I take it for a drive on the highway, it’ll go up 2 or 3 mpg.My old Civic lost 1mpg average when my old route to work installed a stop sign at an intersection.
I dunno how ben is really calculating his MPG, but it seems like he’s going by the lines on his gauge. I use the super easy method; I take the number of miles I’ve driven, then divide it by the number of gallons I put in the tank and I get my MPG for that tank. I also stop at the first click, so I know it’s full and that the pump shuts off at the same level each time
Not correlated much but I continue to be surprised at the gas mileage of new mid size cars. It seems to be from the ones I looked at 26 to 28 hwy. I get 23 from an 03 Blazer with a 6 cyl, hwy,4wd if I need it, have more space and can tow my boat. At 10k miles per year it is a no brainer. Being generous that would be $320 a year, or 26 dollars a month savings for something that would not suit my needs, much less a new car payment.
How odd, about 10-15 posts disappeared from this thread.
@FoDaddy, ben will just say that he’s been driving this car for 20 years and he knows that his gauge is linear. If you’re lucky, he’ll add some gratuitous insults. Best to ignore the rest of this thread.
benny, you are making assumptions about people you know nothing about. Now I have not called you stupid, or told you to shut your mouth or insulted you in any way. A stickalectomy is not an insult, it is a little barb. If I wanted to insult you, I would have suggested that you need a rectalcrainalotomey or a plexiglass belly button implant. But I did not do that to you.
If you think that I will be gone long before you, you are probably right considering my age, but I don’t plan on going anytime soon. I’ve been posting here since 1997 and I’m still in pretty good health. In all that time, you are the first to ever call me a troll.
You might not want to compare your IQ, education or automotive experience with mine, you haven’t lived long enough on two of those accounts, and you probably have never owned a Fiat. But I do wish you the best on your endeavors in those fields.
I also hope you get a change in your attitude. I don’t think you are enjoying life as much as you could. If you are this way around the shop, then I’m afraid your coworkers are going to be rough on you. Be careful when you make claims. You may have the proof, but give it a reality check, would you have trouble accepting it if someone told it to you. While it may/is true, those things are best kept to yourself. Believe me when I tell you I had to learn this the hard way myself.
Good luck in the future, I do hope you hang around, but go a little easier in the future.
I just removed about 10-15 posts, by beninsd and a few others. I think the other affected users were FoDaddy, waterboy, cigroller, and keith. Some of beninsd’s posts were edited to remove the personal attacks, and other posts were removed entirely. To the others, you did not post anything offensive or inappropriate; rather, these posts were removed because the discussion context was very confusing.
Well, Carolyn, It certainly was one of those bad ones. Sometimes it takes me a while to get there but sooner or later I decide to just completely ignore certain kinds of posts (or posters). I’m there.
Mr. Cigroller, I hope this is the beginning of a new era in troll relations. I think your user experience will be a lot more peaceful when you ignore the types of posts you’ve mentioned.
Oh, how I try…but I’m oh so human!! (temper, temper, I frequently repeat to myself).
As you know, there are all sorts of things that make these boards worthwhile and even entertaining 
I certainly do know how worthwhile and entertaining it can be. Why d’ya think I hang around here?
cdaquilla, I think you are doing a terrific job here, even though you did delete my last post. I admit, I had a little fun with this thread too. Obviously, a good time was not had by all though.
Sorry…see what I’ve gone & started now?
I wish wayback woked for this site, you miss a little, you miss a lot. Good company though.
“I just removed about 10-15 posts, by beninsd and a few others. I think the other affected users were FoDaddy, waterboy, cigroller, and keith.”