2008 Pontiac G8 GT: Fuel Mileage Update

Ouch! Overall milage is not that great. I'm sure the car is a hoot though. Just for comparisons sake my 2006 Acura TSX has a lifetime fuel economy average of 26MPG with 22,000 miles on the car. I've had plenty of fun wringing the engine out, but the fuel economy is always more than respectable.

That's a sharp looking car though... wish you guys took a V6 in for long term testing...

Yikes.

I averaged 17.6 on my last tank of 100% city driving with a 4 cylinder automatic (a/c on). I'll take the G8 please...

Ouch. I could understand high teens, but 16mpg?

its within 1mpg of the 135. and that car is smaller, with less power.
 
Yet, the BMW gas milage has been excused. And the G8 is being bashed.
 
Another sign of the clear bias against american cars.

Come on guys. Keep in mind how people are driving this thing. I'm sure when and Edmunds staffer gets this car, he/she is pushing it all the time. I know the one time I drove a G8, I wasn't gentle with it. Yup, the mpg is going to be poor.

opfreak:
The average for the 135i is 20.1mpg which is 4.2mpg higher than the G8.

i saw one parked the other day, definitely a cool car. but yeah, those mpg's suck. (yes opfreak, they [kinda]suck for the bimmer too!)

a car like this is never going to get great mileage when driven by people who don't actually own it. do edmunds staffers pay for their own gas? somehow I doubt it.
 
with that V8, I'm guessing on a long highway trip you could get pretty good mileage cruising along at a steady speed.

sabastian,
The Edmunds update on the 135i lists the mpg at 17.1.

Once again the American manufacturers miss the mark. Sure BMW and Mercedes can sell M3's, M5's and AMG models with HORRIBLE gas mileage. Their owners can afford the gas, even at $5.00 a gallon.
 
So Pontiac has an "eveyman's" performance car that will NEVER appeal to the Mercedes and BMW crowd, that gets 12 MPG or 15.9 overall for averaqe Joe who is being squeezed every which way from Sunday in his budget(food, heat, A/C, taxes, gas, etc.) because of rising oil costs??!! Nice timing once again GM. Bought my first Honda in 1981 leaving GM and my 2 BBl carb 1973 Pontiac Grand Am that stumbled and stuttered with no power and got 12 MPG in my rear view mirror, and have not looked back. That is just great - a super V8 getting 16 MPG with $5.00/gallon gas looming. Nice marketing timing!!! Meanwhile I have a 2008 Honda Accord that does 0-60 in about 6.5 and gets 22+ overall and 28 on the highway with regular gas. Just what morons do they think will actually BUY this car???

The 135i got 17 mpg just for the weekend, 20 mpg overall.

Wow, those are some pretty poor numbers. I think its a good reflection of how much weight can impact fuel economy. For reference, my '02 Z06, modified to 450hp, gets 33mpg highway, 18 city. On my commute to work, which is about 75% highway, it averages 25 MPG, consistently (and that's with plenty of "fun" time too).
 
Similar engine design, but my Z06 is about 1,000 lbs. lighter than the G8.
 
If Americans want better fuel economy, they should look more to weight savings than the engine for solutions.

Isn't this engine borrowed from the GM trucks? That could explain it too, also the driving habits of the people behind the wheel will play a huge factor in the MPG.

The mileage isnt far off the EPA numbers so no one should be surprised. If I'm not mistaken the G35 was in the 18-19mpg range and that car weighs 500lbs less than the G8. The mileage of this car is going to be comparable to an M45, STS, GS460, etc. The GS has an 8 speed auto and gets about the same mileage with a much smaller engine.

my car gets about 14mpg in the city so these results are about what I'd expect.

Disclaimer: I really like the G8, as matter of fact if you don't believe me please check out the review I wrote in my blog. The followings are just some "feed backs" to some comments by another poster.
 
First, so much for the V8 with a V6-like FE... Again, why do I not want the DI V6?
 
"The GS has an 8 speed auto and gets about the same mileage with a much smaller engine."
 
Yeah, much smaller engine with about the same hp, That really speak volume for the 6.0L V8 in the G8...
 
"my car gets about 14mpg in the city so these results are about what I'd expect."
 
I really feel sorry for you... My car's about the same weight as yours, gives me 40 more hp but gets me 19.5 mpg for city driving. Let's not get into that you are in Philly and I am in LA argument since I am in the part of metro LA that has lots of traffic lights...

Bear in mind that the vehicle is still in break-in and has been track tested and regularly beaten...and I don't think any road trips yet.
 
Watch for it to climb by, my guess, 3mpg in average.
 
Btw, the 135 is capable of very good averages. That 3.0 liter twin turbo is a masterpiece....geared like a V8, with the power of a v8, but easily averages 22-23 to 27mpg in mixed.
 
MPG is mostly a function of gearing & aerodynamics; weight does come into play during city driving, but cars like the Vette get fantastic mileage due to aerodynamic properties (very little frontal area) and tall gearing.
 
Did GM change the gearing on the G8 from the truck version? I would hope so, but I could be wrong.
 
Joe

"And the G8 is being bashed.
  
Another sign of the clear bias against american cars."
 
Who is doing this so-called bashing? I feel that all of opfreak's posts could be read to the tune of Dolly Parton's "Hear we go again." This is just ridiculous. All that was said was a reporting of the fuel economy numbers and a subtexted declaration that the given numbers aren't particularly economical. And THEY AREN'T! But, if you'd actually care to notice, just about every blog about this car has been possitive. And as someone said, the 135 is getting crappy fuel economy with them too. Get a different song and stop copy-pasting the same response every single time.
 
And really, is anyone surprised a V8-powered G8 or 300-hp BMW is getting bad gas mileage with this guys? They'd probably get 20 mpg out a Prius.

Correction- my 3000lbs four cylinder car got 16.9mpg on it's last tank according to the fill up this morning so that G8's ain't bad. I haven't seen my redline since gas prices have risen and I drive slow but city driving is murder on any car (except the IS350 apparently) especially with the air on (we are having a heat wave).

sabastian, texases,
You are correct; 20 mpg overall for the 135. For penance I will practise my reading and comprehension skills.

It'll be great market timing again too for the Camaro and the Challenger. Way to go Detroit!
 
Here's an idea to run with - how about a great performing, reasonably priced, relatively economical family sedan instead of these OMG sports sedans?! Oh wait - they already exist - the V6 Altima, Camry and Accord. $26,000 plus tax in most cases with acceleration better than my '68 Camaro SS/RS 396/350 Big Block, and double the MPG. 0-60 6.5 or less, 1/4 mile under 14 seconds, overall economy 22, highway 28-30.

louiswei,
 
You certainly haven't drivin a V8 recently. Yup, you can get the same kind of power from a V6, but the power band isn't anywhere near as good. Drive the G8. The power delivery is wide and smooth. The V6 can't give you same experience. Also, a 360hp V6 is going to be more complicated, more expensive, and less reliable.
 
There's nothing wrong with the V8 in the G8, except that maybe we shouldn't have such ridiculously high powered vehicles to begin with.

"You are correct; 20 mpg overall for the 135. For penance I will practise my reading and comprehension skills."
 
kudos to mnorm for admitting he was wrong - this sort of statement is rare on these blogs.
 
PS brutal gas mileage, even if it is fun to drive. I love this car, but I'm really concerned about its potential market.

That is a really great photo of the G8. Anyway, this really is disappointing gas mileage (although I agree it has a lot do with a tendency towards aggressive driving :) ). Just as a matter of comparison for those bashing V8 cars, my 382-hp, 2+ ton S550 averages right around 19-20mpg and has gotten high twenties on the highway. Its a true testament to what a great transmission can do for a car.

16 mpg isn't as bad as it sounds.
 
Edmunds treats cars like rentals and primarily tests in godawful LA traffic, no car is going to get good mileage in those conditions.
 
Look at the last big sedans they tested - they got 21 mpg out of the Accord, 21 out of the Altima, 20 out of the Azera.
 
12K miles a year at 16 mpg instead of 20 is an extra 12 gallons a month. Even at $5 a gallon, if you can afford a $30K + new car that shouldn't bother you.

"louiswei,
  
You certainly haven't drivin a V8 recently"
 
Really? Let's see... First I did a test drive with the G8 GT about a month ago, here's the review I wrote as proof: http://www.carspace.com/blogs/advancepursuit/2008-Pontiac-G8-GT-Test-Drive
 
Less than 2 weeks ago I took an IS F out for couple laps on the road course inside the California Speedway. Want proof? Here are the pictures: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=494600&l=06a9f&id=769123057
 
Yeah, the V8s are great and they are smooth but I really wouldn't mind to trade away 5% of that "smoothness" for 4 mpg around town.
 
Here's my question for you brn, have you driven the modern 300+hp V6s (Nissan/Infiniti VQ, Toyota/Lexus 2GR-FSE and the GM 3.6L DI) lately?

louiswei,
 
You're correct. I made an assumption, based on what I saw posted here. I did not look at your carspace and facebook pages before I posted. :)
 
I guess it just "seemed" as though you haven't driven a V8 lately. I don't know how ones measures smoothness, but I bet you'd have to give up a lot more than 5% to get a 4mpg increase.
 
I just took a quick glance at your test drive. I think you would agree that the problem isn't the V8, but rather the cars weight.
 
Yes, I have driven the G37. Thank you for asking.

I'm waiting for the average mileage of the CTS. It contrasts nicely with the last post and its photo of a 30-foot burnout.
 
Cars will deliver based on how you drive. I don't consider this mileage bad at all--if anything, it's a testament to the fun this Pontiac truly is. It begs to be driven hard.
 
Sure, you can squeeze great mileage out of your Prius, but it's because you're driving like a hybrid. Drive a performance car like a performance car, and this is par for the course.

"The V6 can't give you same experience. Also, a 360hp V6 is going to be more complicated, more expensive, and less reliable."
 
I agree with you on the complex and expensive part compared to a pushrod V8 but where do you get that the V8 is more reliable?
 
If you have to compare a 3.5L V6 to a 6L V8 then maybe the V8 is coming up short? Give me a sweet 6 (Lexus/Honda/Infiniti/CTS/BMW) with a good precise snickety snick 6 speed manual and a competent chassis and I could care less about a V8.

"I bet you'd have to give up a lot more than 5% to get a 4mpg increase."
 
Not with the 2GR-FSE...
 
You are right and no, the problem isn't the V8, as matter of fact, there is nothing wrong with that engine, it's a monster. However, I would much rather see a TT version of the 3.6L DI to deliever the same amount of performance but with better FE.

Their fuel economy numbers for the 2008 Honda Accord V6 Sedan are right in line with what everyone else is getting, so I cannnot condemn the test drivers for these bad MPG numbers for the G8. Like the syaing goes - "It is what it is." You want that V8 power - prepared to pay the piper.

"I really feel sorry for you... My car's about the same weight as yours, gives me 40 more hp but gets me 19.5 mpg for city driving. Let's not get into that you are in Philly and I am in LA argument since I am in the part of metro LA that has lots of traffic lights..."
 
drive here and you wont get 20mpg. Period.
 
My point about the GS was that any V8 powered sedan will get similar mileage. Not sure why you went on the attack on that point. Pick your battles. DOnt worry, I want criticizing your favorite brand.

"Did GM change the gearing on the G8 from the truck version? I would hope so, but I could be wrong. "
 
This engine is paired with a 4 speed auto in the trucks. This is the only application with a 6 speed auto.

"It'll be great market timing again too for the Camaro and the Challenger. Way to go Detroit! "
 
Camaro will have 2 V6s available that will get better mileage than V8 model. GM indicated the bsae V6 will get 27mpg on the highway. at least get the facts straight if you are going to jump on the crowded detroit bashing bandwagon.

"Oh wait - they already exist - the V6 Altima, Camry and Accord. $26,000 plus tax in most cases with acceleration better than my '68 Camaro SS/RS 396/350 Big Block, and double the MPG. 0-60 6.5 or less, 1/4 mile under 14 seconds, overall economy 22, highway 28-30."
 
no V6 midsize car gets 22 in the city or 30 on the highway. Mileage on V6 powered imports is about 18-19 in the city and 26-29 on the highway. Only the Accord achieves 29 on the highway though. The Impala gets 18/28 with a pushrod V6 and 3600lb curb weight.

"However, I would much rather see a TT version of the 3.6L DI to deliever the same amount of performance but with better FE."
 
You arent going to get much better mileage out of a turbo engine. Look at the mileage of turbo cars like the 9-3 aero and Sti, the numbers arent encouraging. The idea that you can get dramatically better mileage froma forced induction engine of smaller displacement is debatable. Give the G8 a 350hp V6 and you might gain 1mpg, 2 at most. The CTS has a V6 with much less torque and can only manage 17/26. The 9-3 Aero cant even match the CTS' mileage in spite of having a 2.8L engine.

"My point about the GS was that any V8 powered sedan will get similar mileage."
 
And my point was that the GS has a much smaller V8 but puts out roughly the same power as the much bigger G8.
 
You got your point across and I got mine. What's your problem?
 
As for the Philly vs. LA traffic we've went over this before. Next!

Not a smaller V8. A lower displacement V8.

"You arent going to get much better mileage out of a turbo engine."
 
Well, so much for having faith in the mighty GM huh?
 
BMW 330i returns 18/27/21 and 335i gets 17/26/20. If the over rated BMW can accomplish this with only minus 1 mpg then why can't the mighty GM do the same with its 3.6L DI?

You showed BMW dropped 1 mpg on the EPA test with the turbo 3.0 relative to the NA variant.
 
If GM accomplished the same thing by sticking a turbo on the V6 powered G8, dropping 1 mpg.. it would then achieve 16/24 mpg against the G8 GT's 15/24.
 
A gamechanger, clearly.

Yeah, but clearly the V8 isn't returning 15/24/18, it's more like 12/21/16...
 
How is the LT CTS doing on FE? Is it returning something that are closer to the EPA suggested figures?

1487
  
Don't take it so personally. Nobody is "bashing" anyone - I am simply saying their timing and marketing is off, and their "mid-stream" products are boring and lack performance. Kind of like surfing - you catch the wave or you don't. Ford caught the wave with the Mustang and Chrysler with the PT Cruiser - GM with the Camaro and the HHR will have missed it as will Chrysler with the Challenger. GM's mid size and full size sedans do not begin to compare performance wise and economy wise with the Altima, Accord and Camry. And you should get YOUR facts straight - no one claimed to 22MPG in town - I said 22 all around, and my '08 Accord V6 EASILY does that.I could improve on it with a lighter foot. The Impala cannot touch the Accord's sophistication, performance or mileage - and the Accord too weighs 3600 pounds. Look, I had a Trans Am that got 29 MPG on the highway. Unbelievable - 2000 RPM/80 MPH. But my Accord will out accelerate it, and when it comes to bumpy roads - the Trans Am would be in the ditch with its solid rear axle. GM either misses the mark with its market timing, or its products are not competitive with the Japanese manufacturers. Facts are facts - "It is what it is."

"The Impala cannot touch the Accord's sophistication, performance or mileage - and the Accord too weighs 3600 pounds"
 
Gross exaggeration- the Impala will get 34 mpg on the highway with a full load at 65 mph- I've done it. Have you driven one? The ride is liquid smooth and whisper quiet even with 18" wheels. As for performance, I haven't seen a 3.9L V6 version tested but I'd assuming 0-60 is around 7 seconds. It's rated at 18/28- only one mpg less than the Accord in both city and highway. It doesn't idle in 3 cylinder mode bring down it's EPA city rating but if you maximize coasting, you'll easily beat those figures.
 
The Accord's fancy V6 sacrifices power and torque for 1 or 2 extra mpg- see one of HondaAcura4's links.
 
The Altima drinks premium fuel which negates any economical advantage it may (or may not) have over other cars. Feed it regular fuel like its competitors and you'll lose 15-20% of the horsepower.

loiuswei- 1487's right- you will not average 20 mpg here in Philadelphia.

opfreak, if you could never mention the import bias again, that would be awesome. Call a waaambulance, bro.
 
16 mpg is decent for what the G8 offers, and I'm sure that you could easily squeeze over 20 mpg from it. I guarantee that the average consumer won't push the G8 like the edmunds staff will...its kind of their job to do so. The 135 is quicker than the G8 and still gets better mileage; this is the advantage of a big V6 in a little body vs. a big V8 in a big body. The G8 and 135 don't compete, so whats your point, anyways? Quit wasting your breath here, please.

"loiuswei- 1487's right- you will not average 20 mpg here in Philadelphia."
 
Have you seen what rush hour's like on I-405? Or in Santa Monica, or anywhere in metro LA except the OC suburbs that apparently you guys have in mind? I thought traffic in Atlanta (number 2 worst traffic in the nation behind DC) was bad before I moved to LA and I had to commute to downtown Atlanta every day (I went to school there)!!

From what I've read, GM has the current king-of-the-hill engine for performance to mpg in small displacement F/I applications in it's 2.0 liter turbocharged unit. The GTI also does very well. The Mazda DISI engine does fair, but also uses pretty short gearing.
 
Someone brought up Saab, which I thought was interesting. Saab has had their 2.3 liter turbo 4-cylinder in the moderately heavy Saab 9-5 for years and years...and that engine can consistently give you high 20's mixed or low 30's highway. In a moderately heavy application. Putting out 250 HP and some very nice low-end torque. Their 2.0 liter turbo is also quite capable (just not as much so in both performance and fuel economy).
 
These are, to a degree, the future of automotive performance applications. It's far easier to combine tight packaging requirements, fuel economy needs, weight needs, manufacturing cost requirements, performance needs, etc. etc. into a small displacement F/I unit that is mass-produced. And the technology is there, nowadays, to make those units produce serious power & economy.
 
Moving back to the original point of this thread: Someone compared how the Accord is doing in edmund's fleet vs the G8. I must ask: Have you ever driven a sporty car? When I drive an Accord, I drive sedately. It's the nature of the beast: it doesn't encourage sporty driving.
 
The G8 on the other hand...
 
Like I said, lets see some road trips in it and after it's further broken in...
 
Joe

louiswei- I've only been to LA once but I was just in Atlanta in April. The difference is that Philly is an OLD city with a dense grid of streets every couple hundred yards- stop signs are the devil here (along with lights of course). And there are only two freeways in the metro area (inside city limits). Crawling in traffic is one thing as your speed doesn't increase or decrease drastically but here- just going from point A to B gives your brakes a race track quality work-out. Newer cities have more open road plans and more freeways unlike this ancient city.
 
PS- Atlanta has the worse drivers I've ever experience. That place is a clear example of what NOT to do when planning roadways for a major metro area. I hate driving in that city.

"BMW 330i returns 18/27/21 and 335i gets 17/26/20. If the over rated BMW can accomplish this with only minus 1 mpg then why can't the mighty GM do the same with its 3.6L DI?"
 
WTH are you talking about? My point was you arent going to see signifigant mileage gains by going to a smaller turbo engine. The CTS gets 17/26 with a 3800lb curb weight and the 335 gets 17/26 with a 3500lb curb weight. How in the world did you disprove my statement? The BMW 3L is direct injected which enhances mileage. To get a truer comparison you need to compare two non DI engines. GM's 2.8L in the 9-3 doesnt get better mileage than the NA 3.6L V6 and the turbo requires premium. The turbo makes 255hp and the 3.6 makes 252-255hp.

"And my point was that the GS has a much smaller V8 but puts out roughly the same power as the much bigger G8.
  
You got your point across and I got mine. What's your problem?
  
As for the Philly vs. LA traffic we've went over this before. Next!"
 
The GS has a DOHC engine so its specific output BETTER be superior to the 2 valve engine in the G8. People generally associate higher displacement with lower fuel economy so my point was that the GS gets worse mileage than the G8 in spite of weighing less and having a smaller engine. The G8 has far more torque than the 4.6L in the GS460.
 
Philly and LA have nothing in common from a traffic standpoint. LA is a city designed around cars, Philly is a city designed at a time when cars werent in existence. In most parts of the city you cannot drive more than 500 ft without hitting a stop sign or signalized intersection. You are stopping all the time. I would say less than 20% of the residential streets here have speed limits in excess of 35mph.

"Yeah, but clearly the V8 isn't returning 15/24/18, it's more like 12/21/16... "
 
You were comparing EPA figures and he did the same. Different people will get different results from the G8 depending on where they drive and how they drive. A person not living in a major metro area like LA would likely be able to get closer to the EPA numbers.
 
"Have you seen what rush hour's like on I-405? Or in Santa Monica, or anywhere in metro LA except the OC suburbs that apparently you guys have in mind? I thought traffic in Atlanta (number 2 worst traffic in the nation behind DC) was bad before I moved to LA..."
 
Let me put this simply. Your city mileage in an east coast city is bad ALL THE TIME. We arent just talking about rush hour. You cannot sustain any speed in the city unless you are on the two inner city highways or a handful of other roads (the roads adjacent to the river in the park for example) but 90% of the time you are in stop and go mode. Even at 10PM. It has nothing to do with rush hour.

"GM with the Camaro and the HHR will have missed it as will Chrysler with the Challenger. GM's mid size and full size sedans do not begin to compare performance wise and economy wise with the Altima, Accord and Camry. And you should get YOUR facts straight - no one claimed to 22MPG in town - I said 22 all around, and my '08 Accord V6 EASILY does that.I could improve on it with a lighter foot. The Impala cannot touch the Accord's sophistication, performance or mileage - and the Accord too weighs 3600 pounds."
 
You are very misinformed. GM midsize cars currently get 22/30 with a 4 speed auto. The Accord gets 21/31 with a 5 speed an a whopping 8 more hp. For 2009 the Aura gets the 6 speed standard and will get either 22/33 or 22/32. The Malibu currently offers the 6 speed on the LTZ model and gets 22/32. For 2009 that combo spreads to the 2LT model. Your assertions about GM powertrains in midsize cars not coming close to that of the Accord are baseless. The Accord V6 betters the mileage of the Aura/Malibu V6 but does not beat those cars in performance. In spite of a 16hp deficit the Malibu is faster than the Accord. The Impala is within 1mpg of the Accord while offering more space and a larger trunk. Both cars have VCM technology and VVT. The Accord is faster, but not by a significant margin. I would love to hear how the Impala "cant touch" the Accord in mileage when it achieves practically the same combined EPA mileage.
 
I have no idea what the HHR has to do with the Camaro but the HHR has sold well since it's introduction. The Camaro will likely get around 17/28 with the V6 which is comparable to V^ family sedans. Not sure how that constitutes missing the wave. Nissan is preparing a 370Z that will get less than stellar mileage and the Sti gets only 17/23 and requires premium fuel. The I35i which is considerably smaller than the Camaro gets 18/26 on premium fuel. A camaro with the DI V6 will likely match that easily. If GM is missing the boat by launching a V6 powered sports coupe in 2009 than the same should be said of every other manufacturer that is offering similar product.

"I said 22 all around, and my '08 Accord V6 EASILY does that.I could improve on it with a lighter foot"
 
The combined mileage for the LT Aura is about 21mpg which is about the same as the LT Accord. Also, if you look at the Edmunds V6 comparo you will see that the Malibu was right there with the Accord (22.5 for Chevy vs 22.8 for Honda) and thus your theory doesn't hold water. I have gotten as high as 29mpg on highway trips with my car. That matches Accords EPA highway rating.

1487 While I could respond to all your GM rants with facts, I actually have a life, and you obviously do not. The Accord outperforms every vehicle you cited in the real world and in road tests and is consistently ranked among Car and Driver's Top 10 cars.
 
As for the Camaro and the HHR - my point is they are both too late to the dance - Mustang got the pony car market before these gas prices hit, and Chrysler had the PT Cruiser YEARS before now to the point that their sales have fallen off - the wave has hit the beach. If you cannot understand the analogy, you will never understand marketing.
 
The Honda does NOT idle in three cylinder mode. But again, why let facts get in the way of your arguments? Drive off in the antiquated technology GM continues to try to shove down consumers throats. They still manage like they did for years - here is our car - now buy it. Not, Gee, I wonder what consumers would like, and make it?

"1487 While I could respond to all your GM rants with facts, I actually have a life, and you obviously do not. The Accord outperforms every vehicle you cited in the real world and in road tests and is consistently ranked among Car and Driver's Top 10 cars."
 
The Malibu is on 10BEST this year and has out accelerated the Accord in EVERY comparison test so far when equipped with the V6. Feel free to bring on your "facts".
 
"Chrysler had the PT Cruiser YEARS before now to the point that their sales have fallen off - the wave has hit the beach."
 
PT cruiser sales have trailed off but the HHR is still doing OK.
 
"The Honda does NOT idle in three cylinder mode. But again, why let facts get in the way of your arguments?"
 
When did I claim it idled in 3 cylinder mode? I said the Impala and Accord V6 have cylinder deactivation technology. Do you dispute that? I'm not even sure what statement you are arguing about. I laid out plenty of facts that clearly disprove your GM bashing claims. I see you are one who believes you don't need to cite any numbers when declaring one automkaer is clearly inferior to another.
 
antiquated technology? Like direct injection, DOHC heads, dual continuous VVT? I think you should look into the tech behind GM's latest V6 and compare it to Honda's 3.5L SOHC V6 before you accuse GM of using "antiquated" technology. Or perhaps you don't know what the word means. I'll let HondaAcura get into the details with you but even he will find fault with your latest inaccurate statements.
 
Personally, I dont think making up facts certifies that you have a life.

"Chrysler had the PT Cruiser YEARS before now to the point that their sales have fallen off - the wave has hit the beach. If you cannot understand the analogy, you will never understand marketing. "
 
HHR sales were up 23% last month and are up 6% for the year even though the vehicle has been out for 3 years. If you dont understand that you'll never understand why I didn't buy your argument that the HHR was too late to have any succcess.

"HHR sales were up 23% last month and are up 6% for the year even though the vehicle has been out for 3 years. "
 
I am not going to look for sales numbers, but I see plenty of HHRs on the road. To me, they are worlds better than the PT Cruiser and, since this is a thread about fuel mileage after all, they get an eco-auto cash rebate here in Canada because they are so fuel efficient.

"The BMW 3L is direct injected which enhances mileage. To get a truer comparison you need to compare two non DI engines."
 
Uh... I guess you need to re-read my post, I was comparing the TT and non-TT version of the BMW I6 to get a rough idea on what kind of performance and FE would be for the fictional TT 3.6L DI... That's why I was asking does the LT CTS return a similar mileage close to what EPA has suggested. If so then it makes a TT 3.6L V6 a much better candidate than the V8, if not then you are right, the V8 would be just as good.
 
"my point was that the GS gets worse mileage than the G8 in spite of weighing less and having a smaller engine. The G8 has far more torque than the 4.6L in the GS460. "
 
Oh so the GS460 now gets worse mileage than the G8? Trying to sneak one by me? You want to talk EPA? Let's talk EPA:
 
GS460: 3945 lbs, 342hp, 339 lb-ft, 17/24/20
LS460 (same engine as the GS but tuned differently): 4244 lbs, 380hp, 367 lb-ft, 16/24/19
G8 GT: 3995 lbs, 361hp, 385 lb-ft, 15/24/18
 
I urge you to take a close look at the LS460 and G8's numbers. I rest my case...
 
As for the LA traffic vs. Philly traffic, you are not going to convince me and I am not going to convince you so why don't we just drop it.
 
Oh, as for those who think we don't have "stop and go" traffic here let me just say that my daily one way 10-mile communte consists of about 50 traffic lights and stop signs. If that's not "stop and go" then I don't know what is...

And an increase from 2 to 3 is a
33 1/3 % increase. What are the real numbers? Is it making strong market penetration?
 
Referring to the Honda comparing the Malibu -
 
"As for performance, I haven't seen a 3.9L V6 version tested but I'd assuming 0-60 is around 7 seconds. It's rated at 18/28- only one mpg less than the Accord in both city and highway. It doesn't idle in 3 cylinder mode bring down it's EPA city rating but if you maximize coasting, you'll easily beat those figures."
 
As for GM "technology" - I and my family have been the victim of their "technology" all too often - Corvair, Olds Diesel, Cadillac V8-6-4, Vega, Olds DOHC V6, original Buick V-6 (a V-8 with two cylinders lopped off), The Corvette "Cross Fire" (AKA cease fire) injection, etc. The things you point out are advanced - the real questions is how are they executed - and I got very tired of being a GM guinea pig.

"I urge you to take a close look at the LS460 and G8's numbers. I rest my case... "
 
I was thinking about the real world mileage in a recent MT test of V8 luxury cars. The GS got the worst real world mileage in that test but you are correct in that the GS has better city mileage than the G8. The GS430 was rated at 16/23 and I wasnt aware of the boost that came with the 8 speed. Either way, my orginal point still stands. If you get a V8 powered sedan this is the type of mileage you are going to get.
 
Have you ever been to Philly, Boston, Baltimore or NYC? Unless you have I fail to understand how you are going to inform me as to how those cities are identical to LA in terms of street layout and traffic flow. I've been to LA and several other similar sunbelt cities. I'm not sure how you feel you are an authority on how Philadelphia is laid out. Perhaps you can explain. There are 18k non signalized intersections and 2800 signalized intersection in Philadelphia and its about 1/3 the physical size of LA. ANY city that was laid out before cars were prevalent isn't car friendly. See European cities for reference. If you'd read what I said closely, its not just about intersections- its about maximum speed and density of intersections. There is a reason why public transportation is far more widely used in the cities of the NE than they are in cities like LA. The "worst" mileage numbers you see in these LT tests are consistent with the mileage you would see driving here.
 
Its seems to me that these LT cars are getting close to the EPA combined numbers so I would expect the G8 to end up in the 17-19mpg range by the time it's done here. That's right where it should be. The CTS is 2mpg better in the EPA cycle and will likely be about 2mpg better in real world mileage. Throw twin turbos on that 3.6L and watch the mileage drop. Think about this, the Sti gets worse mileage than the CTS in spite of having an engine that is 1.3L smaller and weighing about 700lbs less.

""As for performance, I haven't seen a 3.9L V6 version tested but I'd assuming 0-60 is around 7 seconds. It's rated at 18/28- only one mpg less than the Accord in both city and highway. It doesn't idle in 3 cylinder mode bring down it's EPA city rating but if you maximize coasting, you'll easily beat those figures."
 
when did I write that?
 
"s for GM "technology" - I and my family have been the victim of their "technology" all too often - Corvair, Olds Diesel, Cadillac V8-6-4, Vega, Olds DOHC V6, original Buick V-6 (a V-8 with two cylinders lopped off), The Corvette "Cross Fire" (AKA cease fire) injection, etc. The things you point out are advanced - the real questions is how are they executed - and I got very tired of being a GM guinea pig."
 
sorry you have an ax to grind over 30 year old GM engines but that has nothing to do with what we were discussing. I am sure we were talking about current offerings, not engines that existed before I was born. In 1980 it is entirely possible that GM engine technology was inferior to Honda engine technology. I'm lost as to how that is relevent today. You ask how are these technologies being executed and I submit that you should check out LT tests here and in other places and consult reliability rankings. If you have some evidence that GM's recent (or even not so recent) powertrains are unreliable please share it with us. There may have been a time when American powertrains were lagging, but that time is past.

I am not dissing the V8s on making bad mileage, all my posts were intended to find out if a TT or high-output V6 would serve the same purpose but with better FE. Again, I was trying to make a discussion, not to say one is definitely better than another.
 
I have been to Baltimore and DC.
 
This is my last post regarding the traffic topic. Again, my daily 10-mile one way commute consists of about 50 traffic lights and stop signs so don't give me a lecture about "stop and go" traffic. LA is very big and in places like Santa Monica and Pasadena it's very possible to find similar situations as you described about Philly.

This crap about stop signs in Philly has got to go...I haven't seen anyone in Philly do less than 20mph through a stop sign. It's called the "philly roll"...
 
:)
 
1487 - Please, please, please post once for all your comments. This habit of yours of posting 3 seperate comments for every time you actually post is getting old. Ok, it's been old, now it's just getting annoying.
 
Joe

louiswei- the GS460 and LS460 have differenet engines. The engine in the LS460 has the same twin fuel injection technology of the IS350, the GS460's V8 does not.
 
If GM added direct injection to the turbo 2.8L HF V6, you'd see a mileage boost. However, such an engine does not exist. The only way you could add performance and economy to the current 3.6L DI engine, is to decrease it's displacement while adding a turbo.
 
ljgbig- I wrote made the statement about the Impala, not 1487.

Thanks chavis10, I stand corrected.

Louiswei- it's all good. Before the new EPA formula came into play, the LS460 was rated at stellar 19/27 due to the same technology used in your car's engine. I guess Lexus wanted to create seperation between its flagship and the lesser GS by dumping HP and simplifying the engine with the side effect of lower mpg.

"This is my last post regarding the traffic topic. Again, my daily 10-mile one way commute consists of about 50 traffic lights and stop signs so don't give me a lecture about "stop and go" traffic. LA is very big and in places like Santa Monica and Pasadena it's very possible to find similar situations as you described about Philly."
 
check the sticker on a 2008 or newer car. It gives you the range of mileage you can expect. On my car the city range is 14 to 20mpg. I get close to 14 so I am within the EPA's expectations. I dont understand why you cant get that. In certain city environments you are going to get mileage close to the low end of the EPA's estimates. LA and Philly are not the same. Never have been and that partially explains why you are exceeding your EPA rating.
 
"1487 - Please, please, please post once for all your comments. This habit of yours of posting 3 seperate comments for every time you actually post is getting old. Ok, it's been old, now it's just getting annoying. "
 
I cannot have the posts be any longer. I am responding to multiple people. If it annoys you then I MUST stop. That is definitely something I want to avoid.

"There may have been a time when American powertrains were lagging, but that time is past."
 
The Corvair was the first turbo charged flat six - way ahead of Porsche, the Vega an all aluminum block, the 1966 Pontiac Tempest Sprint an OHC inline six with 4 speed to be a competitor with European products, and the Cadillac V8-6-4 and Olds Diesels for economy. I am not saying GM power trains were lagging -they just do not R&D them enough for their use on the street, put them in people's hands and that is their R&D. All of the aforementioned engines were very advanced for their time in one respect or another - but not thoroughly or properly executed. Oil burning, head warping, pushrod tube seal leaking, sutting down, etc. were all halmarks of GM "advances". Why is today any different? Time will tell.

"Oil burning, head warping, pushrod tube seal leaking, sutting down, etc. were all halmarks of GM "advances". Why is today any different? Time will tell."
 
If you think everything is the same in 2008 as it was in the 60s I don't know why were are debating here. You are basing your case for poor GM engineering on engines produced 3 to 4 decades ago. Sorry, but that is hardly relevant to today's vehicles. You strike me as one of those dedicated American car bashers who has little knowledge about current products and bases his opinions on less than reliable products made 30 years ago. I would not recommend anyone buy a GM product from the 60s or 70s but I would recommend one of their current models.
 
Again, if you have any proof that GM powertrains are lacking durability let us know. Otherwise I think we have to presume that GM's engines are as reliable as their competitors. I think engine reliability is excellent across the board these days.

It has to do with corporate philosophy, not bashing. The domestic manufacturers for years did their research selling cars to the public. Then they finally got some competition from a source and culture who would rather die than inflict pain on their customers, and bring shame on themselves and their families. Engineers at GM were without question terrific. I am not faulting them - I fault the bean counters. Their cutting corners caused the execution of great engineering to fall short. Why put a balance shaft in a harmonically unbalanced engine - just savve $$$ and leave it out - who cares the engine runs rough as a cob. Or not putting manifold gaskets on the 1988 5.0 and 5.7 liter V-8s - just some sealant saving $.10 a car - only to have them leak at 15,000 miles and require a $300 warranty job, and inconvenience the customer. That is nore what I am talking about than engineering, and guess I was not clear.
No, I have to disagree with you about the relevance of a manufacurer's history. It reflects its corporate culture - and if things have really changed at GM - hurray for them. Hopefully they will find a lot of people with short memories to whom they can sell their cars. Mine is not. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. Ever hear the story of the boy who cried wolf?

"It has to do with corporate philosophy, not bashing. The domestic manufacturers for years did their research selling cars to the public. Then they finally got some competition from a source and culture who would rather die than inflict pain on their customers, and bring shame on themselves and their families."
 
You need to get off the Japanese culture worhsip Kool Aid and join us in reality. Have you not been paying attention to Toyota's recent quality woes? Have you not heard that CR has stopped automatically recommending Toyotas due to subpar quality from the Camry V6 and Tundra and GS350 AWD?
 
"No, I have to disagree with you about the relevance of a manufacurer's history. It reflects its corporate culture - and if things have really changed at GM - hurray for them. Hopefully they will find a lot of people with short memories to whom they can sell their cars. "
 
I dont feel people willing to overlook 30 year old quality issues have a "short memory". Its apparent you have no interest in the competence of the current product. You are only concerned with "corporate culture" and ensuring that the image of domestic automakers remains tarnished due to mistakes made decades ago. I assure you the people running GM in the 70s are either retired or dead. I don't care what Toyota's advantage was 20 or 30 years ago. The vehicle they produce today are not superior to those made by GM. You can try to cover that up by talking about the superiority of Japanese culture but the reality is many of today's "Japanese" products are designed and built by Americans. If you can explain how their "all american" products are wholly superior to GM's I'd love to hear the rationale.

"The vehicle they produce today are not superior to those made by GM. You can try to cover that up by talking about the superiority of Japanese culture but the reality is many of today's "Japanese" products are designed and built by Americans. If you can explain how their "all american" products are wholly superior to GM's I'd love to hear the rationale."
 
Your responses are insulting - "drinking the Japanese Kool Aid". Listen - I had a 1993 Dodge Intrepid - not GM, but American. At 28,000 miles the whole friont suspension had to be rebuilt, at 34,000 miles the transmission went, at 52,000 miles the water pump seized and took out the timing belt with it, and proceeded to do it again at 60,000 miles while visiting in Wrightsville Beach, NC, stranding us. The flywheel cracked in half at 61,000, and then the car would only sporadically start. This was the top of the line model with the 3.5 SOHC V6 engine. This is the ONLY car I have EVER wholesaled for auction price - I would not sell it to anyone in good conscience. No, my exxperiences with American made cars has NOT been good and in the meantime have owned Honda/Acura products over a span of 27 years without EVER having a breakdown leaving me or my family stranded, or for that matter, any significant mechanical malfunction of any kind. So, yeah, Detroit lost me years ago. Just like they lost a lot of customers with their shoddy engineering and manufacturing. So you can sing their praises all you want - unless they offer me one for free, I will never again subject myself to the aggravation and financial loss I have suffered at the hands of American manufacurers.
 
As for the G8 - back to where we started - I just think it is the wrong car for the wrong market, and with that mileage and current gas prices they are going to sit on the lots with the Hummers and all the other Detroit gas guzzlers.
 
All I have to say is have you ever heard of J.D Power?