[EvoXAddict]

I know that Edmunds reported that: "... announced today were official EPA ratings for the Evo X. The GSR earned 16/22 mpg for city/highway, while the paddle-shifting MR did slightly better with 17/22 mpg."

Can anyone confirm these values? KMX or someone else from mitsu?

 

[dmx88227]

iam guessing these are estimates because part of the whole SST movement was for better fuel economy and if this is true then idk wth they did wrong

 

[EzeE1o]

lol, well technically it has 1 mpg better in the city, so it is "better on gas" slightly

 

[dmx88227]

yea lmao " better on gas" ..................... ppl told me that when u drive the IX to its full potential u get like "4 mpg" how true is that and maybe the SST would be better on gas when u drive it to its full potential

 

[Kooldino]

Well, you're not exactly driving it at WOT around town all day long...I think they have a system.

Either way, hopefully some weight reduction will help the fuel economy.

For a car with direct injection and a new 4cyl motor, the gas mileage is piss poor.

 

[Antilag]

What are the EPA requirements not to get hit with the gas tax? Over 20 MPG on highway?

 

[silvreclipse]

this fuel economy really sucks i get 17mpg on my work truck being empty and its a 6.0l.

 

[Spiritech]

I posted it somewhere in another thread, but here it is again so more people can see it. They changed the way they estimate the MPG's; now the Evo 9 would be 17/23 and 16/22 for the 6 speed; even the Civic took a hit at 28/34, I vaugely remember it hitting high 30's to 40 before.


www.fueleconomy.gov

"Starting in 2008, estimates will reflect the effects of

Faster speeds & Acceleration
Air Conditioner use
Colder outside temperatures

the tests lower MPG estimates for most vehicles"

:tmyk:

 

[J-sPeEd]

16mpg is really, really bad but seriously tho. if u cant afford the gas, dont buy the car. if u cant afford gas .period., you cant afford a 30k+ car.

 

[soileaujr]

16mpg is really, really bad but seriously tho. if u cant afford the gas, dont buy the car. if u cant afford gas .period., you cant afford a 30k+ car.

no one can afford to destroy the environment!
if the Vette Z06 can get 16/26 with 7L then mitsu can do better.

 

[Kooldino]

^True story.

 

[R_E_X]

Are You sure that SST more fuel economic?

I bet it was drived with normal mode right?

 

[_Chris_]

Are You sure that SST more fuel economic?

I bet it was drived with normal mode right?

It is...
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007/07/mitsubishi-moto.html

 

[soopah]

no one can afford to destroy the environment!
if the Vette Z06 can get 16/26 with 7L then mitsu can do better.

Is the Vette AWD? There must be significant power losses in the Evo AWD drivetrain, anyone know how much?

 

[soopah]

The WRX and STI also have poor MPG ratings:
WRX (sedan and wagon): 19/24 (manual) 20/25 (automatic) (WTF?)
STI: 17/23

 

[gumby]

I posted it somewhere in another thread, but here it is again so more people can see it. They changed the way they estimate the MPG's; now the Evo 9 would be 17/23 and 16/22 for the 6 speed; even the Civic took a hit at 28/34, I vaugely remember it hitting high 30's to 40 before.


www.fueleconomy.gov

"Starting in 2008, estimates will reflect the effects of

Faster speeds & Acceleration
Air Conditioner use
Colder outside temperatures

the tests lower MPG estimates for most vehicles"

Spiritech's got a good point. The wesbite also provides old vs. new mileage estimates for cars. This link might be of interest...

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorCompareSideBySide.jsp?column=1&id=21843

 

[Kooldino]

^Ah, so the old evo and the new evo have the same real world fuel economy.

 

[Kooldino]

For a car with direct injection and a new 4cyl motor, the gas mileage is piss poor.

Just wanted to say that according to SCC, the production X is in fact NOT direct injection. Can anyone confirm this?

 

[_Chris_]

^ Ive heard its not.