I'm sorry but that car just isn't rocking enough...I'm going to start calling you SuburbanCorporateSellOutGuy
I think calling me Idon'tCareWhatOthersThinkAsLongAsI'mHappy would be more appropriate
I'm sorry but that car just isn't rocking enough...I'm going to start calling you SuburbanCorporateSellOutGuy
I think calling me Idon'tCareWhatOthersThinkAsLongAsI'mHappy would be more appropriate
Listen here SuburbanCorporateSellOutGuy, return that grocery getter and sack up to this!
I have a 2011 Touring Sport, fully loaded with the factory 17 inch rims. A very nice car. I use it to commute from Hamilton to Toronto every day.
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/11/02/...d-mileage-claims-will-compensate-o/#continued
Pretty well known in the industry that Hyundai is "optimistic" about their claims. And that is just being politcally correct.
I knew it all along, but never tested it officially. I knew manufacturers test their cars on a perfectly flat surface so did not bring it up with the dealer. I'm disappointed with these guys.
I guess i'll have to speak with my dealer
Sent from my tablet using my paws
That article pertains specifically to US vehicles, so you may not get reimbursed from a Canadian dealer. Still worth a try.
EPA has frequently (if not always) checked the fuel economy numbers that is calculated from the FTP, US06, and SC03 drive cycles. These are the cycles are used in conjuction with road load coefficients to generate the window stick fuel economy rating. Until very recently, they haven't always checked the vehicle road load coefficents that indicate air drag, rolling resistance, and static friction. Prior to checking these road load coefficients, EPA would use the values submitted by the manufacturer and take them at face value.
I'll let you do the math and come up with the rest of this story, because the article nor Hyundai explain what the actual descrepancies are. And the whole being apologetic thing is simply saving face and trying to retain their customer base because I can assure you that Hyundai knew about this from day one and the competition knew about it shortly after the vehicles were released for public sale. The original article states that an EPA staff member noticed a descrepency, but I can assure you that EPA has many OEM's in their ear on this matter.
I have the 98 Accord V6. 180k kms. Same as you, excellent shape. Only alternator, 2 batteries, 1 set of brakes, and just recently 1 ball joint. In 14 years, thats all the car ever needed. Starts and runs perfectly. Hope to get it 20 years before ditching it. Its just been so good to me and a comfortable car. Kinda hard to get rid of it.
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/11/02/...d-mileage-claims-will-compensate-o/#continued
Pretty well known in the industry that Hyundai is "optimistic" about their claims. And that is just being politcally correct.
OP - I don't recommend a used Mazda 3 (if you're looking to buy used). We have a fully loaded 2008 Mazda 3 that we bought new. It looks fantastic and drives great. But when there's a problem with it no dealership can seem to fix it. I've tried 3 local dealerships to fix the same problem and they all give me the same dumb a*s look. I still don't have the problem fixed going on 2 years.
Great cars that hampered by their terrible customer and mechanics.
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/11/02/...d-mileage-claims-will-compensate-o/#continued
Pretty well known in the industry that Hyundai is "optimistic" about their claims. And that is just being politcally correct.
You need to look into CAMVAP while you still qualify, that's where I may be heading with my vehicle.