I can't look!!!

I wonder about that too. It would be nice to compare the shape of speed vs mpg graphs for similar cars with different power engines.

The superwhat?

---

https://fueleconomy.gov/feg/photos/19...tiva_HBK_W.jpg

Another comparison: nine 88-92 manual transmission Festiva owners reported avg FE of 40.45 mpg (US) at fueleconomy.gov. Compare to EPA combined estimates of 38-41, depending on the year.

15 Chevy Aveo & Aveo 5 owners (manual transmission) averaged 28.68 mpg (US), compared to EPA rating of 29 or 30 depending on year. (= 4.4% below 30).

The Geo hands down under 60mph kills the yaris imho for beating the epa mpg. I have 1 of each and if I was going 55 or less from here to florida and was alone I would take the GEO and make money on the trip on a bet.

But the yaris in comfort, ride, handling, acceleration and many other creature comforts wins and at over 35-40mpg to boot even in the winter. Also there is only a 1mpg epa difference in the auto/manual yarii.

So if me and her are going to Florida the yarii goes too.

I would also bet that people do not drive the yaris like they drive the geo. They expect that 40mpg on the sticker no matter what they are doing to it and shockingly they do. I said this part to say this, Darin you in a Yaris manual would be a site to behold against the mpg. If the avg joe get above, think what 50+mpg would be like in a yaris. The Geo has a tough road to hoe on a commute based mpg daily grind against the epa no doubt.

Really? If you compared % over EPA at 55 mph for both cars, the Geo would win?

I don't think there's any question it'll return a better absolute MPG figure at a given speed, but I still suspect that relative to it's EPA figure, it'll be worse off than the Yaris.

---

Another randomly picked comparo. Still haven't found an econobox whose EPA is further from reality (such as it is - these really aren't valid samples) than the Metro's...

Toyota Tercel, 1991-97, 8 drivers reporting

- 37.3 average mpg
- 33.4 EPA combined (average - the figure varied from year to year and whether it was a 4- or 5-spd manual)

= 11.6% above EPA

Just collecting more...

17 Ford Escort drivers, '91-'98

- 31.4 avg mpg
- 31.75 EPA combined (average - range was 28-32 for different model years and 4- vs 5-spd in some years)

= 1.1% below EPA on average

I'm just happy my Festiva is maintaining a higher average than all you Metros!

The Festivas are also mentioned in an online article "Cars that last a Million Miles". Longevity also affects the long term economical impact of what you drive.

Darin what's the CdA of the metro is it about .33 or so?

I've notice that with the Daewoo (1.6L), smallest engine I've driven, if you make the slightest imput to the gas there is a drastic increase in fuel and manifoild pressure with no response compared to the bigger engines. There is a huge lag and It's almost like you need to just think about the desired imput and then wait and it will get to where it needs to be with out much decrease on the FE if your patience.
I wonder it the test on the dyno for epa are really precise and that the average driver of the 1.6l and down engine, to stay with the traffic flow, make an imput and the delayed reaction, because of the lack of HP, they keep putting the foot into it to get the "normal" acceleration which really kills the FE.

Or it could be as simple as with the Prius that people think that anything over 40MPG is outstanding and don't try as hard because it twice what everybody else is getting.

Just rambling, it will be interested to see what up come up with.

except mine:D

It's interesting I went to the EPA website to see the location of the cars. Quick glance and I came up with METRO 60% were in cold country, Yaris 55% , Ford 66% and the Toyota is impressive 85% in the cold country and beating epa by 11 %. Granted it's not very scientific but more to think about.