That's why they have a CVT-- you get performance AND economy (03 A4 3.0 CVT - 21 mpg city / 28 mpg highway 0-60 in 6.8 secs)
Thanks Doug. That's more or less my point. People seem to forget that you
> can get performance AND reasonable economy.
> I was just asking the question to determine how bad or good the EPA
> estimates were for this car. As I stated in my reply to Pete. I
> have no problem with the mpg numbers listed on the EPA sticker for the
> auto, as that is what I am looking at. But if these are not even close,
> well then I'll
> pass on this car, at least until FSI comes out and hopefully improves the
> mpg. I originally was looking at the V6 with Ultra Sports package. But it
> has almost the
> same EPA ratings as the V8. Since the price is not a limiting factor, I
> thought, why not get the V8, and it's performance if the fuel economy is
> the same as the V6.
> Wouldn't you? And most people that I've spoken to about the V6 seem to get
> better than what it's rated at.
>
> All those who have commended, "if you're looking at a V8, then you can't
> be concerned about economy" . Let me ask you this. Would you have still
> purchased this
> car if the EPA numbers were in the single digits??? Was your criteria
> really such that you only cared about having a V8? I'm sorry, but for me,
> it's not as Black and White a
> decisi>
>>If you're worried about fuel economy, you should not be buying a V8 in
>>the first place. If can afford a new S4, you can also affor the gas.
>>And if you can't afford the gas, perhaps you can't afford a new S4 >>either.
>>
> It's not about affording the gas, it's about wasting it. 15 MPG is
> ridiculous, especially for a smaller car..
>
>
>
> To reply, please remove one letter from each side of "@"
> Spammers are VERMIN. Please kill them all.
>