Tha car under todays fuel economy tests (2008) the 93 cavalier 3.1 3 speed auto woud rate 18-26mpg, in 1993 your sticker said 20-28mpg. So although I want to believe you. I THINK YOU ARE MISTAKEN. Realize that the extensive and precise test performed to establish these rates are far beyond what you could hope to duplicate. So please, I respectfully disagree...along with science, General Motors and the EPA.

BTW, all HHR's wil get better gas mileage assuming the same conditions, fuel, driver etc than any unmodified 93 cavalier ever could dream. At worst 21-29mpg, so if I do "take your word for it" then we all should be at 34mpg on the highway at 72.

I boast/brag/beat my chest over my mileage, and

I CANT GET 34MPG AT 72mph ON CRUISE FOR ANY SIGNIFICANT LENGTH.

Sometimes I'm way too serious though, maybe I missed your sarcasm.

 

I on the other hand I believe him not a problem. My dad is driving a 1990 Pontiac Grand Am and gets 32 mpg on every tank. Thats 97% in town 3% highway, so I have no problem believing that.

 

I am not at all saying that it is impossible......just very unlikely that trained coporate professionals with everything to gain by "claiming" super high mileage would miss such a STAGGERING difference in fuel economy IN THEIR FAVOR!!!

What I believe is what I have seen before. People believe they get better mileage than they actually do. It's even more difficult to believe on the highway since these guys are claiming a 3-SPEED auto. If the car was abnormally aerodynamic (it is most certainly not) I might give what you say some benifit of the doubt. The weight difference is a non factor since we are talking about the highway.

Ill say it again. If your getting 32mpg from a car at 72mph that scientifically proven to deliver a minimum 26mpg at 55-60mph, you are mistaken.

I submit that you would be lucky to return 24-25mpg in a 93 cavalier 3 speed auto at 72mph on cruise.

I will be a better HHR forum member and begin some tests. Youtube video, scan guage data, other people driving my beloved SS (yikes) to show the difference the driver makes, maybe even me driving a rental HHR 2.4 and 2.2 on my regular routes just to prove some of my theories. This type of thing is why I became a Chemical Engineer in the first place.

Can the moderator or whoever is in "charge" of this forum tell me how I would go about that. This is the first forum I have ever contributed to and I do not know the rules of posting, bandwidth, server speed and all that mumbo jumbo if it applies. We could all benifit from this MORE THAN data-less sarcastic remarks about the 77mpg My 197X, 198X, 199X, could get at 90mph back in the day!

 

I used to go to Hershey,Pa. for the big swap meet/car show.Back in 1999(the onl year for which I still have the gas log)I got 31.62 m.p.g.($1.30/gallon,btw) going there to the gas/lunch/potty break that I took about 125 miles from Hershey.The return trip(with higher alcohol content Pennsylvania gas) with the cruise set at 72 got me 30.43 m.p.g at the fill up in Toledo,Ohio,420 miles later.

 

It was YOUR car, so I cannot tell YOU what gas mileage YOU got in YOUR car. If you did keep a gas log, then that is the proof. You may have had one lean-running 3.1, your speedo may have been off by +10mph, or the conditions on that specific day/route/terrain may have benifited you. Either way,you should have kept that car....lol.

 

I would have kept it but like most J bodies(especially the later ones-the body dies were worn out and tolerances went away)it had water leak issues at the cowl/windshield area.The water eventually wasted the (in)convenience center on the '93 and made for some interesting electrical tricks.We had an '88 Cavalier wagon prior to the '93.That one had a severe windshield leak that was only cured by a woman who turned left in front of us and totalled the car out(3 months after it was paid off!).

 

I just got my HHR last week. I usually judge MPG by several tanks averaged to get a good idea what I am getting, but after filling her up to the top for the first time still had 1/4th tank left, it shows to be getting right at 27mpg. This is 2/3rds city and 1/3rd city-hwy driving. It also included about 45 minutes of parking with the engine running. It is a 2008 HHR Shadow Special Edition with the 2.2 engine and has about 400 miles on it now. I would expect this will improve as it breaks in after a few thousand miles, as other chevy's I have owned/own did. Note that this is driving in summer temps of 90+ degrees with the AC running on max/recycled air. While I drive very hard, I am taking it easy most of the time on the takeoff just to get a picture of what it does with a normal driver and not my lead foot...LOL

 

Sorry about to hear about the car dude.
I forgot to specify that the HHR is less of a "brick" than the 93 cavalier...... .354 HHR beats the .40 cavalier, so at all speeds....even higher than 70mph the HHR should get better mileage. So maybe I should stop over at Lordstown tomorrow and let those guys know that they need to bring the 3.1 back?

 

We got great highway mileage with our 2002 Grand Prix with the 3.1L; city mileage sucked though. That car got 17 or so in town and 30-31 hwy vs the HHR at 20 in town/ 28-30 hwy. Overall for the driving we do the HHR does better than the grand prix. Plus the 3.1L has more mechanical issues(intake manifold gasket for one) in general. The ecotec is a much better motor.

 

Yeah..... I (and most of the world) knows that the ecotec is better in all aspects than the 3.1. for mileage, emmisions, power, durability,so on an so forth. In addition the cd is higher in those older cavaliers so the hhr suffers from less (head on) drag. This is why I can't quite put my finger on why (now 2 people) are getting better mileage on the highway than the hhr with old 3.1 cavy/grandprix. I would even say gearing or weight, but those will affect city mileage more than highway, and no one has yet to say the 3.1 is better in the city (quite the opposite) than the ecotec.

I'm stumped.

I guess I'll put a 3.1 on my HHRSS...no wait lol, I have 100 more hp and I reset my DIC at the last fuel up, ran down to stow and back to cleveland. 34.3mpg and I tried to annoy this S6 Audi on the way back home. Ill keep the ecotec