Terrible Tom wrote:
>
> Josh Battles wrote:
>
>> ""Aaron Wyse"" <awyse@sw.rr.com> wrote in message
>>
>>> I've gotten a best of 25 mpg from my '95 2.5L Dak, but my '94 is usually
>>> doing good to get 20mpg, this mornings fill-up showed 14.5mpg. A
>>> 4cyl Dak
>>> is not as economical as it sounds, same motor in my old Turismo would
>>> get
>>> almost 40mpg.
>>> I think the best bet is a V6 and a light foot.
>>> Aaron Wyse
>>
>>
>>
>> I do pretty good with my V6, but I don't have a light foot at all. I
>> usually get about 17 in stop and go traffic, and anywhere from 22 - 25 on
>> the highway, depending on speed and wind direction. Last year when I was
>> driving to the BBQ, I could have filled up every other time that Barry
>> and
>> Tom did. I think every time they tanked, I only ended up putting in 8
>> or 9
>> gallons.
>>
>
> I'm already stashing money in the mattress to save up for fuel costs for
> the next BBQ. That 360 is gonna suck major gasoline amounts with a
> trailor and a truck behind it. (grumble)
That's why the devil invented credit cards.... Josh, don't think we
didn't notice your lack of "unity". Actually, if you had put your
truck on a trailer behind mine, and paid half of my gas, you still would
have paid more.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 01 2005 - 00:18:30 EST