Typical ABG comment. Ignore any positive, like the fact that it gets the same hwy milage as a Civic Si, but root out anything you can to bitch about because it's a GM, like a bloody drag coefficient. What's the point of a low CD? HIGH FUEL ECONOMY. They got what they needed without making it look like a bar of soap.

↓↑report

You're taking ONE data point to compare to a Civic SI?

How about the rest of the operational range of this car? What happens when you blip the throttle? Gun it?

Yeah this is no bar of soap...it's a brick.

↓↑report

It's the EPA rating. The same system used for every other car sold in North America, and it's a very large car compared to the Civic, with a body designed for style rather than fuel economy, yet it STILL achieves the same on the highway. That's with a lot more power too. I'm the one who can't see the bigger picture here? GM has done something pretty special here, if you ask me. Their V8 gets better economy than the Mustang V6. How's that for another bout of perspective?

You're still proving to me that you're incapable of seeing that GM has made an achievement here. Why? My only guess is because it's GM.

↓↑report

You've still not told me what good a low CD is? I know it, but you seem to be ignoring it. You complain about the number without seeing the fact that it already achieves high HIGHWAY milage with what you consider a high CD. What's the point of complaining again? Based on your importance of a drag coefficient, blipping the throttle is moot. A high CD is all about high speed cruising, not accelerating or blipping the throttle. What good does a high CD in a Civic do the car if you 'gun it'?

↓↑report

*sorry, in those last two sentences I should have said "low CD", not high*

↓↑report

Something doesn't seem right? How does the SS have a lower drag coefficient than the base car?
275 width rear tires don't help
The slit in the leading edge of the hood.
The larger wheels, for more turbulence.

Is it the rear spoiler? because if that lowered overall drag in spite of the wider rear tires, that would be worthwhile upgrade for increased highway mileage on all models.

Don't get too worked up over a early specs sheet.
Wait for a real world comparison.

They wanted retro, they got retro.

↓↑report

Oldraven,

Sorry I forgot to put that info in. Most cars should be designed to get at the most 0.30 if not lower. Frankly, any car that doesn't meet that criteria these days should be designed to do so....that includes any manufacturer from Honda to Ferrari. There's no excuse...particularly for road cars.

↓↑report

A high CD is like having the car held back..having less power. Gun it in a low CD car and you'll see better results...and over time..over thousands of miles, you'll see a huge difference in mileage.

Is there something wrong with designing a car to be more efficient in all aspects?

↓↑report

Wow Noz you are an idiot. There is way more to aerodynamics that Cd. The REAL drag is calculated as a function of Cd and frontal area. Unless you know the frontal area of both cars, it makes no sense to compare Cd. That is like comparing horsepower when power to weight ratio is what really matters. ALSO the lighter the car the more the Cd matters, the heavier, the less it matters. Simple physics.

"What happens when you blip the throttle? Gun it? "

LMAO!!! What does happen if you blip the throttle of a Civic SI or gun it at high speed. Very very little. That little engine has no torgue down low, so unless you are cruising on the hwy near redline, very little happens with that car. The Camaro will absolutely lay waste to the civic. (now the real bar to compare these cars to is the new WRX).

But another point. What matters these days is selling cars. A good Cd does not sell cars, it makes them look homogenous. So Kudos to GM for putting someting interesting on the road that still gets good mileage without looking like a camraccord-ima-civic (SI or not)

And also for comparison, the performance leader in this class (WRX) gets 17/25 and requires premium. The GTI gets 20/29 and it also requires premium.

↓↑report

Hey BoneHead...fitting name by the way.

I'll let in on a secret...NO SHIT there's more aerodynamics than CD.

But CD is a good indication to how efficient the car's aerodynamics is to reducing resistance.

Hey idiot...the coefficient of drag has elements other than simply frontal drag...go and learn something about aerodynamics before your foot enters your mouth.

And if you can't understand the concept of "gunning" it with LESS resistance, go back to school and learn something first.

Let's get the real combined mileage of this car then talk.

And the lighter the car more the CD matters????? LOL...OK...I'll let you believe what ever you want...lol.

↓↑report

You want retro looks, you get retro CD.. do we really want every car to look like a greased jelly bean?

I would like to see some guestimates on hwy mpg if they retained the same frontal area/weight but lowered the CD to .25 or so.. also at what hwy speeds.

↓↑report

First they regulated fuel, then emissions, then airbags, then side impact beams, then stability control, then CAFE, now you want to regulate shape? Sorry, GTFO. I can understand having a more responsible design, but if everything has to look like a Prius/Insight, please kill me now.

↓↑report

>>"And if you can't understand the concept of "gunning" it with LESS resistance, go back to school and learn something first."

I cant understand the concept fo gunning it in a CIVIC SI. That is what i was talking about. At highway speeds it is pimping something like 60ftlbs or torque. This is why i said "unless you are cruising on the hwy near redline, very little happens with that car when you gun it" - improved drag or not. The Camaro likely accelerates much faster despite its drag.

>>"And the lighter the car more the CD matters????? LOL...OK...I'll let you believe what ever you want...lol."

please refer to F = M*A. Newton and I are on the same side of this arguement. Drag is a force being used to decelerate your car, the more mass, the less it affects your car.

"go back to school and learn something first."

Keep em coming Noz, these are the most entertaining comments ive read in years.

↓↑report

This only makes Honda poor highway gearing even more annoying.

Civic SI: Much Smaller engine, much less weight, much less power, much more aerodynamic and the pulling the same MPG.

How did Honda manage to make the Civic so poor in highway fuel economy?

The only thing I can see, is that the gearing is ridiculously short (the opposite of the Camaro). This is one thing that turned me off of the Fit. Honda thinks people with manuals don't drive on the highway or like the drone of constant 4000 rpm. :(

↓↑report

LOL at you guys arguing over spec sheet EPA estimates.

Wait till the real world test, then let's see how many get 29mpg in their Camaro. I'm guessing most will get something like 20mpg max.

↓↑report

Hey Bonehead...

You're too smart for me. Ask Newton what wind resistance is....I'm sure he's not on your side when you explain to him that you think it's a make believe force only in your head.

I'm funny....you're even funnier.

↓↑report

Newton knew all about wind resistance as it relates to force. Sure fluid dynamics did not exist yet but he was the one that predicted dropping a feather and a brick on the moon would cause them to fall at the same rate due to lack of wind resistance. I wasnt being funny, i was pointing out that mass does make a difference when dealing with the decelerating effects of drag.

Was that supposed to be a "joke" about make believe forces in your head?

↓↑report

Good start to your kindergarten level understanding. Perhaps you can also understand that when ACCELERATING the resistance of drag and increased MASS is additive.

I'll let you sit on it for a while.

↓↑report