Car and Driver's tests of "$18,000 mileage makers"

The May 08 issue of Car and Driver has comparisons of 8 $18K "mileage makers." On p.93 they listed the mileage they got on these cars over a 300 mile drive. Although I don't believe they use a specific course and driving schedule for this drive, here are the numbers they got. ALL of them were equipped w/a 5 speed manual.

Ford Focus SE: 25 mpg
Mitsubishi Lancer GTS: 21
Saturn Astra XR: 24
Scion xD: 26
Subaru Impreza 2.5i: 22
Suzuki SX4 Sport: 24
Toyota Corolla: 28
VW Rabbit S: 22

The test avg. was 24 mpg across all cars. This should open the eyes of Prius whiners who complain about getting only 35-38 mpg.

FWIW, when C&D reviewed the Prius (Toyota Prius - Road Test - Green Machine - Car And Driver), they got 42.03 mpg and ~50 highway/~52 mpg city at The Frugalympics - Comparison Test/Sedans/Comparison Test/Reviews/Car and Driver - Car And Driver.

 

The as test prices of the cars they tested ranged from $16,160 (Corolla) to $20,570 (Lancer).

As for the Cobalt "which is good for 35mpg highway", well the highest EPA highway mileages in this review were had by the Focus (24/35) and Corolla (27/35). The highest EPA city mileage in the review was again the Corolla: 27.

But, alas, the Focus got 25 mpg in their 300 miles and the Corolla got 28 (the king of this test).

 

You can't be serious about it being "a very nice car". Cavaliers are pieces of crap with horrible GM Tupperware interiors. I've had my share of Cavalier/Sunfire rentals.

FWIW, when Consumer Reports tested an 03 Cavalier LS auto, they got 18 city/37 highway, 26 overall. Their review (which was current when they did it) starts out with:
"The Cavalier received the lowest overall score of any current sedan we’ve tested. It’s a flimsy, crude car that’s noisy, cramped, and uncomfortable. Its only redeeming features are its quick acceleration and smooth-shifting transmission."

Some other choice quotes from that review:
"The Cavalier doesn’t damp out road bumps well. The ride stays busy even on a highway. A full load makes it even more jumpy and jittery. The cabin is a noisy place, intruded upon by a general din from road, wind, and the buzzy engine.
...
The interior is dated and furnished with flimsy, ill-fitting trim"

 

you must live in a reality distortion field if you think crap cars like Cavaliers are "nice"

Consumer Reports is not biased IMHO. You probably think they're biased because a # of GM vehicles either don't do well in their reviews and/or have poor reliability coupled w/your living in reality distortion field.

Irregardless of their review, yes, they were rentals and my opinions and factual perceptions of the rental Cavaliers and Sunfires had nothing to do w/the review (which I didn't even look at until I posted last night).

No, they were not early 90s Cavaliers and yes, the were pieces of crap. If you don't think the interior quality of the Cavalier was crap, boy.... I've got a bridge to sell you. The interior of Cavaliers from that era were amongst the WORST interiors of ANY vehicle in that era. I'm talking about the quality of materials, fit and finish and styling. Just because they were rentals doesn't suddenly make them worse in these 3 attributes. They're the SAME vehicle.

Even Bob Lutz has admitted a # of times about GM previously have lousy interiors. Example is this from 10/21/03 http://www.edmunds.com/advice/specialreports/articles/100660/article.html:
"What is the number-one challenge facing GM right now? It sounds like it's changing the company's perception.

...
And as I say, part of the communication is how the car is put together. Because, again, you can have a totally reliable car with crooked body gaps, a door that closes with a bad sound, cheap interior plastic parts, carpets that don't quite fit. None of those things are a reliability problem or something that you go to a dealer about, but they're not nice. And it's up to us, as we've done in the Malibu, and as we will do in all of the cars we launch, that all of the sights and sounds, materials, controls and everything will contribute to sending the message of quality, as opposed to detracting from it. But you're right, it's our biggest problem — the lingering reputation that American companies, General Motors in particular, cannot produce consistent quality the way the Japanese can."

Also go look at this article from 9/02 BW Online | September 2, 2002 | Cars: What's Inside Is What Counts.

With your last statement, there you go again making up things and putting words in other people's mouths. I never said anything about that.