2.0L Performance Tech 260hp (235hp auto) Turbocharged SS tuner version. 260 lb-ft of torque

SS gas milage

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-26-2008, 01:28 PM
  #31  
Senior Member
 
ColeTrickle's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-26-2008
Location: Corona CA
Posts: 164
08 SS 5spd (800 miles)

On my second tank of gas and I am averaging 27 mpg on my 60 mile round trip commute (42 mph average speed)

On level ground with the cruise at about 75-80 the car gets right at 32 mpg

The performance/MPG is hard to beat
ColeTrickle is offline  
Old 07-03-2008, 02:55 PM
  #32  
Senior Member
 
jerSSey HHR's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-03-2008
Location: jerSSey, exit 5
Posts: 1,664
Okay - here's a dumb question. If the 2.0 turbo gets such good gas mileage, why not replace all the V-6 engines that are getting similar HP and repalce them with the 2.0 turbo engines? Even the Solstice GXP gets better gas mileage than the base Solstice. It seems that with the Ecotec turbo you can get great power and fuel mileage. Is it because people don't want to pony up the extra money for the turbo version? Because many of the V6 cars are more expensive than the HHR SS.
jerSSey HHR is offline  
Old 07-03-2008, 03:19 PM
  #33  
Senior Member
 
Clevelandhhrss's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-31-2008
Location: CLEVELAND
Posts: 772
Originally Posted by jerSSey HHR
Okay - here's a dumb question. If the 2.0 turbo gets such good gas mileage, why not replace all the V-6 engines that are getting similar HP and repalce them with the 2.0 turbo engines? Even the Solstice GXP gets better gas mileage than the base Solstice. It seems that with the Ecotec turbo you can get great power and fuel mileage. Is it because people don't want to pony up the extra money for the turbo version? Because many of the V6 cars are more expensive than the HHR SS.
A lot of it is just ignorance. People like cylinders, more=better....just like rims, and women...etc. I like efficiency, Period. That's what we have here, a gas sipping, powerful, large enough, small enough, 4 door, hatch, lightweight, well built thingomobobber.
Clevelandhhrss is offline  
Old 07-03-2008, 05:36 PM
  #34  
XXL
Senior Member
 
XXL's Avatar
 
Join Date: 05-06-2008
Location: Over here
Posts: 1,076
Originally Posted by Clevelandhhrss
A lot of it is just ignorance. People like cylinders, more=better....just like rims, and women...etc. I like efficiency, Period. That's what we have here, a gas sipping, powerful, large enough, small enough, 4 door, hatch, lightweight, well built thingomobobber.
There is also the mechanical issue of torque. A 5000# car doesn't get rolling from a dead stop as well as a 3500# car. More pistons/more displacement _generally_ gives you more torque at usable levels... so the big car gets the big motor to get it rolling.
XXL is offline  
Old 07-03-2008, 06:53 PM
  #35  
Senior Member
 
Clevelandhhrss's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-31-2008
Location: CLEVELAND
Posts: 772
Originally Posted by XXL
There is also the mechanical issue of torque. A 5000# car doesn't get rolling from a dead stop as well as a 3500# car. More pistons/more displacement _generally_ gives you more torque at usable levels... so the big car gets the big motor to get it rolling.
Or low gearing.....lol...like a rock cawler with 35inch tires. Both bad for mileage.....
Clevelandhhrss is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
puterfool
Problems/Service/Repairs
30
08-30-2015 10:52 PM
Happy Jim
Fuel Economy - Hypermiling
35
12-30-2010 09:01 AM
Mofo
Fuel Economy - Hypermiling
0
07-14-2009 12:38 AM
dpoll995
HHR SS
2
10-03-2008 11:15 AM
Kev1964
General HHR
9
07-13-2008 05:56 PM



Quick Reply: SS gas milage



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:16 PM.