Another popular misconception:m our gas guzzlers!

[c4koh]

All,

Just been arguing with a friend of mine and, just like our Yanks can't go around corners, they also need to fill up every 10 miles...

So, in the quest for setting the record straight, found this info on another forum:

http://speed.supercars.net/cBoard?viewThread=true&fID=49928&tID=48696&bottom=15

2004 Corvette Z06 = 19/28 mpg (5.7L V8)
1995 Corvette ZR1 = 17/25 mpg (5.7L V8)
2003 Ford Mustang Cobra = 17/25 mpg (SC 4.6L V8)
2004 BMW M3 = 16/24 mpg (3.2L Inline-6)
Audi 1.8 TT = 20/28 mpg (1.8L TT I4)
Aston Martin Vanquish = 11/18mpg (5.9L V12)
Honda S2000 = 20/28mpg (2L I4)
Jaguar XKR = 16/22MPG (4.0L V8)
Porsche 911 Turbo = 15/22 MPG (3.6L TT F6)
Lexus SC430 = 18/23 MPG (4.3L V8)
Subaru WRX STi = 18/24 MPG (2.5L TT I4)
Subaru WRX = 20/27 MPG (2.0L TT I4)
Toyota Supra Turbo = 18/23 MPG (3.0L TT I6)
Nissan 350Z = 19/26 mpg (auto) 20/26 mpg (manual) (3.5L V6)
Mazda RX-8 = 18/25 mpg (manual) 18/24 mpg (auto) (1.3L Rotary *Twin Rotar Renesis 13B*)

All of this is US mpg, so x1.2 for UK, and is City/Highway I believe.

Not that mpg is the be all and end-all, but just another popular misconception exposed!!

[viperdave]

In my experience

Corvette on a trip back from Cornwall 28Mpg
Megane on a trip back from Manchester 33Mpg

As the vette is probably measuring in US gallons so x1.2 = 33Mpg

Humm which one was more fun….

[c4koh]

I'd agree with that: on a trip from N Yorks to Porstmouth, I got 27mpg average (being the old fill er up and measure the miles/petrol rather than rely on the computer)... and this was "normal" driving let's say...

I normally go down to about 17.5mpg (no lower on average though) for all-out driving like I stole it, including some very quick bits, and driving around town in 1st, just to make a lot of noise... There's nothing like driving around 40mph in town in 1st gear to get attention

I'll grow up one day I'm sure ... just can't help myself!!

[blackzr]

I bought a new Subaru WRX in 2000, the worst car I have ever owned, bits fell off all over the place and the fuel consumption was hurrendous! I managed to get the consumption down to 8 Mpg on one quick trip (very quick trip) to North Wales and it never averaged more than 22 Mpg even if you treated the throttle as though it were made of glass.

I sold it 18 months later for exactly half of what I paid for it with 17,000 miles on the clock and a full (very expensive) dealer service history.

Lesson learned!!

[c4koh]

Was the scooby fun though compared to the ZR1??? Was it really quicker (ignore things like the wet!!) or is that just b**cks??

And as I'm currently arguing in "general gassing" that depreciation will have cost a lot more than any gas guzzling Yank would do in petrol cost!!

[vetteheadracer]

I also had a 2000 WRX Scooby and the fuel consumption was never better than 22mpg. I loved driving it, but like blackzr lost loads on depression (sorry depreciation) over the 2 years and 36,000 miles of ownership.
It was a fantastic car to drive and was a hoot on corners, only problem was the top end was shit at about 140mph.
Took it around Castle Coombe and it was loads better than my old C4 vette. I overtook everything in the same session as me including Caterhams!
My Z06 has returned about 18 (x 1.2) = 22/23 MPG to the gallon for the first 25,000 and that is over the whole range from daily commuting to track days.

[c4koh]

Nigel,

So I have to ask - is your Z06 a better (well obviously!) car than the Scooby, better in: feel, handling, and of course any "real" evidence like track-times etc? I mean I'd expect it to sh!t all over it, but does it??

Interested to hear!

[blackzr]

[quote]Was the scooby fun though compared to the ZR1??? Was it really quicker (ignore things like the wet!!) or is that just b**cks??

And as I'm currently arguing in "general gassing" that depreciation will have cost a lot more than any gas guzzling Yank would do in petrol cost!![/quote]

Like Mr VHR I did have fun with the car, it had some aftermarket 17" wheels and sticky tyres and would go around corners of rails, BUT (big but) a well set up ZR1 is A) as quick around corners and then B) pisses all over the Scooby down the straights (proven several times, last time yesterday as it happens).

On the point of depreciation if you look at ZR1 prices for instance for the last 10 years they have been fairly static. A good 90 will still command £15 to £18,000. My Scooby cost £21,000 with all the twiddly bits and I got £12,500 for it 14 months later, the same car is now worth around £6,000.

[vetteheadracer]

:c4koh said:

Nigel, So I have to ask - is your Z06 a better (well obviously!) car than the Scooby, better in: feel, handling, and of course any "real" evidence like track-times etc? I mean I'd expect it to sh!t all over it, but does it?? Interested to hear!

The Scooby vs Z06....well the Scooby has 4 seats and under extreme handling conditions it inspired more confidence.

The Z06 in standard spec is excellent on brakes, and handling except in extreme conditions where I always got the feeling I could unsettle the car and it never insipred complete confidence. Since I put the new handling package on the car it can be driven fully committed and given the additional power it is going to be mighty on the track.

I took the car (completely stock) around the full GP circuit at Silverstone last year and it p*ssed all over a TVR Cerbera (it ended up spinning off at the end of the Hanger Straight as it couldn't corner as fast as the Z06). It also left two Skyline GT R33s in it's wake which is no mean achievement for any car. Whereas my C4 would have cooked the brakes and ed the front tyres, the Z06 tyres and brakes were absolutely fine after a 20 minute session.