Its seems 40MPG is a magical mark. Consumer Reports in their own testing of MPG(consistent method) found vehicles as expect with EPA <40MPG that do 40MPG+.

Good for consumer looking for more choices out there:

http://editorial.autos.msn.com/blogs/autosblogpost.aspx?post=4b431bd8-fb77-419a-bba9-7fe0f466bf3c

Interestingly the maligned Civic LX even by Consumer Reports manages 47MPG in their testing instead of EPA 39MPG.

The cruze eco with the 6MT belongs on that list. But do they even test manual versions? I doubt it.

hrm... did you even follow the link?
of the 17 cars tested, 7 are designated as manual. one of the autos is designated as diesel, and 2 are Hybrids

My 09 nissan versa is rated at 34 MPG highway, I have always gotten 40+ on the highway. It is a 6MT though, so that helps for sure.

Weird how there's a 4mpg difference between the Civic LX and the loaded Civic EX I have a 2007 Civic EX Auto and barely break the 40mpg barrier on highway trips but then again, i'm not doing 65mph in a 70mph zone

I think this test is bogus because they are testing for MPGs in an unrealistic way.

I hate the tree huggers which go -10mph UNDER the speed limit in their little hybrid or some other bucket, trying to get good gas mileage.

I swear, if the government decides to lower the speed limit on the highway, because it will result in better MPGs nation wide, i'm going to lose it!

Nick Fails at reading but at the same time, i also wonder why the Cruze isn't on there...

IIRC, the government lowered the national speed limit in the 70s druing the oil embargo. Reason: Increase fuel efficienty. It is a well known fact about optimal fuel economy at certain speed ranges. Go too fast and you lose MPG's. Down here the limits 70MPH in a lot of places, I think thats too fast for a variety of reasons, and it sure dosent help fuel efficiency.

you mean like they did in the 70's? 55 MPH national speed limit anyone??

here in Buckeyeland, we are still @ 65mph, but there is a bill going through the legislature now, to make it 70 like all our neighbors.

It already gets 40MPG so why put into list???

It's because the article is only about cars rated UNDER 40 MPG on the highway that can actually achieve OVER 40 MPG in the real world.

The Cruze Eco manual that another member mentioned is already rated at 40 MPG or above, so it isn't included.

CT where testing occurs and I think all of New England do not have ANY speed limits >65MPH.

however just because the speed limit is 65 or less doesn't mean people drive that. I certainly don't, and I know a very large percentage of people do not as well.

CR doesn't do peer review or show their methodology so who knows, they might have been running on E10. Did they use AC? Have a trunk full of stuff?

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml tells us already what CR repeats, the "high speed" test goes over 65. And I can hold a steady speed for more than 6 1/2 minutes.



"Everyone" knows going slower helps MPG, but political will seems to have been going in the opposite direction since 1987. I would not worry about lower speed limits yet.

70 is pretty fast, but lots of people don't equate MPG w/ MPH.
I've done road trips in states w/ 70mph (WV, AL, MS) and it's a bit above the 'sweet spot' for my car. my Mazda5 is geared pretty low, and the RPM's are real high at those speeds, MPG's drop way off.

In short, get a smaller car and "don't drive like my brother" to break 40 mpg.

My Cruze Eco MT isn't on that list because its EPA highway rating is 42 mpg. It can/does get better than 42 mpg.