According to Consumer Reports, viagra sale Ford and GM’s turbocharged vehicles did not reach the automakers’ claims regarding the performance and fuel economy.
Consumer reports tested the automakers’ turbocharged vehicles, no rx and found out that Ford’s 2013 Fusion sedan, see fitted with a 1.6-liter turbo engine, is less fuel-efficient and slower than the standard four-cylinder engine vehicles such as Honda’s Accord and Toyota’s Camry.
GM’s Chevrolet Cruze compact, fitted with a 1.4-liter turbo engine, proved to be slightly faster compared with the standard 1.8-liter engine, although the mileage is not better. Consumer Reports rated the Cruze 1 mile (1.6 km) per gallon better in combined city and highway driving.
“While these engines may look better on paper with impressive EPA numbers, in reality they are often slower and less fuel efficient than larger four- and six-cylinder engines,” Jake Fisher, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports, said in an e-mailed statement.
Since November, when Hyundai and Kia overstated their vehicles’ fuel economy and performance, the Consumer Reports and US regulators have kept a close eye on the gaps between real world performance and the official fuel-efficiency tests. In December, Consumer Reports announced that the Ford Fusion and C-Max hybrids fell 17% and 21% short of the EPA rating of 47 mpg.