# car enthusiasts 1  pelosi 0

**URL:** <https://forums.speedlife.net/t/car-enthusiasts-1-pelosi-0/201912>\
**Category:** PittSpeed Off Topic\
**Created:** [February 18, 2009, 10:54am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/car-enthusiasts-1-pelosi-0/201912 "2009-02-18T10:54:49Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 24

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Darkstar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@Darkstar](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Darkstar)\
**Post date:** [February 19, 2009, 6:40am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/car-enthusiasts-1-pelosi-0/201912/24 "2009-02-19T06:40:59Z")

</div>

> [@Crysis physics engine in motion.](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/crysis-physics-engine-in-motion/39651/4):
>
> I would assume (had the proposed measure come into effect) that it would have been based on the sticker mpg ratings, so Mike’s Corvette could still potentially fall into the category of fuel inefficient, depending on if they do combined city/highway.
> 
> I wonder what mpg rating a car would have to get to be considered a fuel efficient vehicle. Was that anywhere in the article?

17/25 which I dont understand… they must be driving around in 2nd gear or something when they do these tests.

---

_[View the full topic](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/car-enthusiasts-1-pelosi-0/201912)._