I hate the article title as none of these are 40 mpg COMBINED mileage cars. Not everyone lives on and works on a highway and is able to do highway speeds for much/all of their commute....
But... I think of particular interest is the graph on the first page (or also at 40 MPG Comparison Constant Speed Chart Photo 13http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1208_40_mpg_compact_sedan_comparison/).
Even before the MY08+ EPA test changes, the highway test results on the Monroney sticker were fudged (adjusted downward) by 22 percent for the highway test and 10 for the city test. The MY08+ changes make it more complicated due to the added tests and you can't just raw unadjusted dyno numbers by those %s anymore.
And, again, the EPA test does NOT measure actual fuel use.
But... I think of particular interest is the graph on the first page (or also at 40 MPG Comparison Constant Speed Chart Photo 13http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1208_40_mpg_compact_sedan_comparison/).
Did you ever read those articles about the EPA test AND also look at fueleconomy.gov to look at some of the test details that I pointed you to?Once again I wonder how the EPA estimate of 42 Highway can be valid, given that MT came up with 42 MPG going 30 MPH faster than the EPA's test assumption of 45 MPH.
Even before the MY08+ EPA test changes, the highway test results on the Monroney sticker were fudged (adjusted downward) by 22 percent for the highway test and 10 for the city test. The MY08+ changes make it more complicated due to the added tests and you can't just raw unadjusted dyno numbers by those %s anymore.
And, again, the EPA test does NOT measure actual fuel use.