My number comes to 128.93(2392x55.43/1000) with las weekend's trip.

Which is why people with heavier vehicles seem to be favoring it, but the number seems to be completely meaningless and the term pound-miles per gallon makes it even more meaningless. At least mpg per pound made sense though it's hardly an absolute and doesn't tell you much vehicle to vehicle.

mpg/ton would give a larger number overall. At 44 mpg my car would be 48.7 mpg/ton.

I just don't like numbers that don't have any particular meaning and unless somebody can give me a concise, rational explanation for pound-miles per gallon it I'll vote against it.

Pound-miles per gallon: 80

Metro, if you don't have the time I'll make a table of everyone's stats in your original post, lemme know.

Sorry, I know I'm probably bugging everyone by now, but I had to figure out some meaning to this pound-miles per gallon thing...which I can only do if I have some basis to go by.

Using the EPA average, my Metro should be 84.0255 (1807*46.5/1000). However, it actually is 1807*43.041 (average of last 3 tanks) /1000 = 77.7751.

This makes my car 7% under the EPA lb-mpg...which is interesting, because I come up with the EXACT SAME percentage if I just use the mpg numbers:

1 - 43.041/46.5 = 7.439%
1 - 77.7751/84.0255 = 7.439%

Can somebody please show me the point in lb-mpg now??? Yes, I'm a pain in the gassavers...

Vehicle weight is going to be a greater factor with people who do a lot of city driving or a lot of steep hill climbing. I agree that if we are going to come up with some kind of equation to give everyone a level playing field, then cdA is going to have to be factored into the mix.

The point of lb-mpg is to factor in vehicle weight. *shrug* though, no baseball fans to figure out good stats for us to use.

But I just proved that on a percentage basis it doesn't factor in anything - it's just a bigger, prettier number that's completely meaningless.

If people want a level playing field then we have to come up with a ratings system that we can all agree on. What about something like this:

Fuel Economy Point Chart

Base points (stock vehicle): 50
Hybrid: -5
Featherweight (under 1 ton): -5
Middleweight (1 to 1.5 tons): 0
Heavyweight (1.5 to 2.5 tons): +5
Ultra-Heavyweight (over 2.5 tons): +10
Manual Trans: 0
Auto Trans: +5
Bone stock meet or exceed EPA (driving style points): +10
Mods: +1 for each mpg increase

I know, that's why I said we needed good stats...but nevertheless, it does factor in vehicle weight.

How about something like:

(cdA * MPG) * ( 1 + (Weight / 2000)) = X

So my d15z1 CRX would be:

(5.71 * 62) * 1.75 = 619.5

Let's see, that's about 3000 miles and 6 months.