It'llrun

I was looking for any interesting story and came upon this... http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoram...190137784.html

Some of it made me ask what they're using as data, but the article goes on to get fairly in depth, explaining some of why America's "Big 3" ranks so low. Too bad it doesn't start off telling why because millions of people won't read that far and they'll just think America's engines aren't fuel efficient. We could be better, but everything has its costs, like a typical loss of power when gaining economy.

The laughable part is that Hyundai clearly has the high marks, but didn't get the overall nod due to previous false claims(of some sort). Of course, none of the top manufacturers offer heavy pickups to speak of, or the weight that comes with truck durability.

Ultimately, the article lends some credence to the idea that America is, once again, really building and selling some of the worlds very best vehicle options these days.

The article also mentions that GM will offer a 10speed transmission soon, CRUSHING the "wow" moment I had about 4hrs ago, when I realized that JEEP is now offering a 9speed in the all new Cherokee! Honestly, if that was offered 5-6mo ago, I'd probably be driving a Limited AWD!

Z Fury

iTrader: (1)

Slightly off topic, but I've read some solid reviews about that new 9-speed in the Jeep too. I'm just not understanding how the 4-cylinder 2WD Jeep is only rated at 31 highway with that transmission when a 4-cylinder 2WD Equinox is rated at 30 with only 6 gears. I may be wrong, but it looks like we're getting into the Law of Diminishing Returns with additional transmission gears. Personally, I think 6 gears in a passenger vehicle and 7-8 gears in a tow vehicle is about ideal.

It'llrun

I was surprised about the 9spd and have interest in seeing a 10spd as well.

As for the ratings, too many gears for the power(torque, really) probably cause it to shift too frequently or have to stay in the lower gears too much of the time to make a good difference. Then again, hwy speeds should allow for the bigger gear sets and I thought about that recently, when looking for a new car. The Hyundai Genesis 2dr is available w/ an 8spd for it's 274hp turbo 2.0L... The result, though I don't remember the numbers, is LOWER economy than the Sonata with the same engine and a 6spd auto. 2 more gears, far smaller and lighter, but lower economy... Weird.

With that, I''m with you on the number of forward gears. Unless/until we're dealing with 400+hp V8's or bigger, I see no need for the added gears because it does appear to dwindle the actual economy. I'm sure they'll get better at tuning in the future, but for now, it seems to hurt. In the case of Cherokee, at least it's better than the last rendition, which was rated around 20mpg hwy with a 3spd auto until like 2006... when it got a 4spd.

justin455

The Cherokee was done in 2001 and had a 4spd for pretty much all of the 90's. I don't care how many gears they give the new one, it won't make it any less hideous.

All that aside, over 6 gears you're really not getting much more. It really depends on the engine and gear ratios of course. In the case of the Hyundai, the Genesis coupe probably walks the Sonata in acceleration and has shorter gears. The engine ends up in boost more often.

It's too bad we can't get some of the small diesel hatches sold in Europe. I would love to run circles around every Prius while getting 70-80mpg to their 40.

It'llrun

Oh yeah, I was thinking Cherokee and remembering YJ's... well, Wranglers or whatever. I think the new Cherokee looks fine, personally. In it's general defense, it is definitely one of the most capable vehicles available and the price isn't so bad.

Fuel economy could indeed be much better overall(with diesel power, particularly), but America has a government bitching about the amount of fuel we burn and all the while, PREVENTING the most economical vehicles which happen to also have a roof and 4 wheels, from being sold in America. It's sad.

Z Fury

iTrader: (1)

The main issue I have is the transmission tuning they put on these new multi-gear transmissions. My wife's '12 Tiguan has a 6-speed auto with the 2.0 turbo 4-cylinder. If you drive it "normally," it shifts WAY too early all the time. I know it is geared for minimizing RPMs in order to reduce gas mileage, but going through a residential area, you are constantly blipping the throttle to force the downshift, which obviously hurts the fuel economy. On the highway, the 6 gears are perfect, and we usually have no issue exceeding the factory rated 27 highway MPG. But given the way the transmission behaves at city speeds, I can see where adding gears would just increase the issue to the extent that it happens at highway speeds too (constant downshifting).

I'm not an engineer, so there's likely something they all see that I don't. But I still stand by my assessment - 6 forward gears feels perfect to me in the majority of the applications I've driven (8 forward gears for towing (2500 series and up) to maintain the max torque rating at all times, but don't make 4 overdrive gears...).

It'llrun - While you were wrong on the old Cherokee, you were still somewhat close. The old Liberty, which was the Cherokee's replacement back in the day, was still rated at a pretty horrible 20/21 highway MPGs through a 4-speed auto transmission.

It'llrun

Well, I was really remembering the Wrangler, for no apparent reason...

Seems your thoughts on the transmissions we're seeing lately are pretty much what it looks like to me, insofar as more than 6 forward gears. I want to know more and am still looking forward to the GM 10spd too, but have the same concerns it looks like you have.

My Escape is also a 2L Turbo and has a 6spd auto. However, I have no issues of early shifts, just slow downshifts. I also have a sport mode, whereupon I can simply press a button to change gears or leave it in a gear of my choice, to a degree. At some point, you're going to want another gear regardless, but the system won't allow D/S too early, thus, preventing over-rev and presumably, driveline damage.

Like the Tiguan, it has issues with city economy. I can exceed 30mpg hwy with no real trouble, even at normal hwy speeds. I cannot, however, increase city economy or meet the supposed 22mpg rating. That's got to have something to do with utilizing the remote start liberally, run the A/C constantly, drive too often in snarled traffic, rarely get on the hwy for more than a couple miles and spend too much time sitting with the engine running while I adjust electronic stuff. I cannot imagine anything but problems if my car had a 9 or 10spd, that's for sure. Another 150hp and I'd want it, but as it is, no.

Z Fury

iTrader: (1)

I think the turbo kills the city mileage due to heavy-foot acceleration. I'm sure you'll agree, unless you are in the boost off of a light, you aren't accelerating fast enough to keep up with traffic.

I may have explained it wrong, but "slow downshifting" is exactly what the wife's Tig does. Thus blipping the throttle to milk the downshift (as I call it), which immediately puts you into boost RPMs (horrible for MPGs). The only quick upshift the thing seems to have is going from 5th to 6th. It really hates 5th gear for some reason. I've driven the thing in Sport mode with manual shifting and it does a little better, but the shift lag from my input to actual shifting is horrible, so I don't do it very often at all (downshifting can take a full second or more sometimes!).

It'llrun

Turbo kills city economy? Say it ain't so!!! Sadly, I can't help but be in boost as it turns out I do have a foot on the right leg... It's in bad condition, but it will mash that pedal and it needs to, like you said, or I won't keep up with traffic.

They sound like near twins in general response terms. I have rarely bothered with sport mode, but only because I just don't care for the position of the button. I nearly bought a Fusion because it has paddle shifters, which worked much better and more quickly. Overall, that car was nicer to drive, but we couldn't meet in terms of pricing. I liked the economy ratings from Ford and I was dismayed and anything but impressed with what I got from 2 Chevy dealers I also visited. They truly had idiots working there and, since I wasn't impressed with anything except CRUZE diesel regarding economy, I bought another Ford. The moron "showing me" the CRUZE literally pointed to the turbo and said something like, 'and that's the bomb right there! It's the best transmission ever!' I was like, WHOA... Buddy, that's a turbocharger, not a transmission, which, by the way, is down there(pointing) where you can't even see it. He was a totally clueless knucklehead. Anyway, I really liked the Impala, but it's economy wasn't gonna do and GM raised pricing considerably after the great review(looked like it to me, anyway).

I looked at the Hyundai, etc. too, but in the end, I narrowed foreign models to 2, the Accord EX-L and the Altima 3.5S, either of which has quite surprising economy and the Nissan was quite affordable, though it wasn't quite as nice as the others. Then I decided on another SUV anyway.

Z Fury

iTrader: (1)

I think all turbo-4 SUVs suffer from the same shortcomings. Overall though, it is a great vehicle for highway travel, as I'm sure yours is as well. Turbos will always make that city rating hard to hit.

I've contemplated what to jump to next when the wife's lease is up (still have about 18 months, but I'm always looking ahead). On one hand, I'd rather have a more predictable drive/performance from a V6 setup, but the highway mileage is a nice plus on the turbo-4s. I guarantee this time I'll test drive a lot more vehicles than just the Equinox and Tiguan. Equinox still had the 3.0 V6, which is why the Tiguan won this last round. The wife likes the smaller SUVs.

I'm keeping an eye on the Buick Encore. Word is they may be going with a bigger engine, which would make it about perfect for her. The current powertrain is horrible, even in an SUV that small.

It'llrun

I only wish I'd have waited for the AWD version, but they had none and I was tired of looking. That helped immensely with the 1.6L I tested(vs FWD), but the engine was too noisy compared to the 2L, plus offers less power. It's really nice on the hwy, but I get more road noise than I'm used to, for sure.

I didn't drive any Buicks this time and should've. The GMC had too much chrome for me and I honestly don't care for the body anyway. Really was set only on cars from GM anyway. I looked at the Regal, but in the end, it seemed to be less car than I was expecting. Didn't even consider a Dodge, but the Cherokee would've had me looking. Looked into BMW and, as always, just didn't wanna spend for that name, not to mention low economy on nearly everything they offer.

Looked at VW (cars) and was almost totally unimpressed. Once I decided against a diesel, those were out. Another that failed to impress, nearly across the board... Toyota. Nothing made me interested except Avalon and I'd rather the Impala or Taurus, each of which were more than I wanted to spend, as was the Explorer Sport. I never lease, as I usually keep a vehicle for years. Subaru had my interest for a minute, but other than AWD, I didn't see anything special, though they seem to do well on fuel economy.

Accord was impressive, thanks to cool features, like the side traffic view and a 268(or more) hp V6 which still got something like 33mpg hwy. That has great tech. involved and is roomy, at least. It was also quite comfortable, though the engine was raspy under hard throttle. Steering was a little too understated, if you will, but I definitely liked the car. I also liked the Civic, which needed to and has come a long way.

I chose the small SUV in the end because I wouldn't pay more for the Fusion. That said, it's best I did because I'm forever moving little things around and the space is nice to have. That said, the Explorer was far and away superior, but for roughly 50k, it needs to be. That engine is sweet too, but not very efficient. It's actually rated very close to the F-150 4X4 CC with the same 3.5L Ecoboost. If not for the 15-21 rating, I'd be driving that instead and I almost wish I'd said screw it on economy. That was part of why I was trading though, so I stuck with it and I don't regret that.

All this is why I brought the article in, really. It reminded me of all the test driving and tire kicking I did for 6mo or so before buying and now, as I look at the rated economy, I wonder if I'd skipped something I may have been interested in driving.