Originally Posted by Vrbas
There's SUVs out there with bigger engines and bigger bodies making what I make (and sometimes more) so I personally think it begs the question. Plus, this is the year 2012 and I figured technology would be on our side for this one :/
In part, you're comparing your actual numbers to EPA or marketing numbers... or God forbid... numbers thrown out on an internet forum that really have little basis in reality.
That's why we have Fuelly, and a couple of threads here with active participation of how to drive more efficiently, and sharing actual numbers.
I see it time and again on forums. People bragging about "##mpg", and it's obvious to someone familiar with the vehicle, that they took their best tank out of the last 10 and said "that's what I get".
It's not always out of deceit... we simply remember our extremes. I'm guilty of it too. I was throwing out "I get 26mpg, but on a road trip at 80mph I only got 22"
I joined Fuelly, and the truth is, I average close to 25. I get a few tanks near 26, and an occasional tank down in the 23 range.
But I remembered my best tanks and my worst tanks.
This was a HUGE thing on the Diesel forums. Guys were reporting incredible numbers that there was no way they were getting consistently (and the worst offenders were the Ford guys trying to show how the Powerstroke was better than the Duramax).
Trucks are a brick in the wind. "Larger" SUVs don't always translate to heavier, and they would be more aerodynamic, so they will hold better MPG at highway speeds, where the pickups get their best economy in the 60mph range.