My local dealer just got in some 2007 G6's with window stickers and mileage ratings. No prices yet but give it another week or so. There were 3 new base sedans with 3500 VVT V6 and 3.05:1 ratio, one base 2.4 Ecotec sedan and one GT convertible with 3900. Sadly all the mileage ratings have gone down.

2.4 models are now rated at 23/33

3500 VVT base now rated at 20/29

3900 convertible automatic 18/26

Compare to 2006 versions

2.4 23/34

3500 22/32

3900 models with automatic 19/26

Also the convertible loses it's bodyside protective molding which I think is stupid!

If the base 3500 models are only rated at 20/29 with the 3.05 gears what is the GT with 3.29:1 gears going to get? Why does the 3500 version lose 3 mpg highway with the switch to hydraulic steering and VVT but the Malibu Max with the same motor and 3.29:1 gears only drops by one from 30 to 29? GM's old press release said that electric steering saved less than one mpg. I honestly think the EPA is on crack when they test these cars and the 08 revisions can't come soon enough

Wow. To be honest, those figures are very sad.

Another thing, not a single person would be complaining about those economy figures if those V6s were in the 260-270hp range. Alternatively, no one would say a word at those horsepower numbers if the fuel economy was 5-6mpg greater.

I hope only 2007 will be a disppointing year, and 2008 will be the turning point.

I'm glad I got a 2006 instead.

there a website to check that out too?

I honestly think the EPA is on crack when they test these cars and the 08 revisions can't come soon enough

It is quite frustrating, but from what I understand the EPA does very little of the actual testing. Most of it is conducted by the manufacturers to the EPA procedure and then the certified results are submitted to the EPA.

It is quite frustrating, but from what I understand the EPA does very little of the actual testing.  Most of it is conducted by the manufacturers to the EPA procedure and then the certified results are submitted to the EPA.

well, the EPA specifies the procedure.

The procedure is not real specific. Kind of like how the horespower ratings used to be. There are ways for GM to improve their mileage ratings like toyota does. If you check out the EPA website to find out real life gas mileage you'll find alot of GM products getting better than they are marked from and every toyota and honda under their ratings.

If you check out the EPA website to find out real life gas mileage you'll find alot of GM products getting better than they are marked from and every toyota and honda under their ratings.

I checked for myself, and nope, not true.

The 3.5 in the 07 is not the same engine as the 06 3.5

The 07 has 23 more HP but 2 less ft/lb of torque, that probably accounts, in part for the lower mileage. GM still hasn't figured out what Nissan, Honda, and Toyota know: how to get more power AND more mileage out of an engine. It is a shame that GM V6 are underpowered and too thirsty. Kinda pathetic actually, considering that Chrysler's ancient 3.5 cranks out 250/250.

Here are the prices without dest.

$16,845 7 Pontiac G6 1SV Sedan

$18,365 2007 Pontiac G6 Sedan

$21,765 2007 Pontiac G6 GT Coupe

$21,965 2007 Pontiac G6 GT Sedan

$24,065 2007 Pontiac G6 GTP Coupe

$24,265 2007 Pontiac G6 GTP Sedan

$28,365 2007 Pontiac G6 GT Convertible

loses it's bodyside protective molding

You do realize that the size and placement of the G6 bodyside molding is useless to the kind of enviornment that we now drive in. My G6 received a big ol' ding back by the gas door two weeks after delivery. From the size and placement, I would have to say from the back door of an SUV. Unless a small car parks next to me, regular car's body side molding is useless anymore from the rash of larger, higher-riding CUVs and SUVs. Hence I either park in the boondocks or find an end parking space and park as close to the curb as possible.

Say what you will about the old Pontiac's body cladding, but my old 2003 Grand Am GT wore door dings well - all I had to do is buff out the cladding.

My local dealer just got in some 2007 G6's with window stickers and mileage ratings. No prices yet but give it another week or so. There were 3 new base sedans with 3500 VVT V6 and 3.05:1 ratio, one base 2.4 Ecotec sedan and one GT convertible with 3900. Sadly all the mileage ratings have gone down.

2.4 models are now rated at 23/33

3500 VVT base now rated at 20/29

3900 convertible automatic  18/26

Compare to 2006 versions

2.4                                    23/34

3500                                  22/32

3900 models with automatic  19/26

Also the convertible loses it's bodyside protective molding which I think is stupid!

If the base 3500 models are only rated at 20/29 with the 3.05 gears what is the GT with 3.29:1 gears going to get? Why does the 3500 version lose 3 mpg highway with the switch to hydraulic steering and VVT but the Malibu Max with the same motor and 3.29:1 gears only drops by one from 30 to 29? GM's old press release said that electric steering saved less than one mpg. I honestly think the EPA is on crack when they test these cars and the 08 revisions can't come soon enough

155927[/snapback]

Actually do not be suprised if milage ratings are down accross the board, on all vehicle brands and all vehicles. EPA changed the methadology for measuring MPG to reflect real world driving conditions. This is not a real change, almost everything in the 2007 is identical to the 2006. The only thing thats changed is EPA has a better grasp on setting the milage ratings.

You do realize that the size and placement of the G6 bodyside molding is useless to the kind of enviornment that we now drive in.  My G6 received a big ol' ding back by the gas door two weeks after delivery.  From the size and placement, I would have to say from the back door of an SUV.  Unless a small car parks next to me, regular car's body side molding is useless anymore from the rash of larger, higher-riding CUVs and SUVs.  Hence I either park in the boondocks or find an end parking space and park as close to the curb as possible.

Say what you will about the old Pontiac's body cladding, but my old 2003 Grand Am GT wore door dings well - all I had to do is buff out the cladding.

159952[/snapback]

I checked out a couple of new G6's. There was a 2007 coupe with no molding and a sedan with. When you opened the sedans door it ended up right where the coupes molding used to be! The deletion of this is yet another cost cutting move and has nothing to do with making the car look cleaner or that everybody drives an SUV so the molding is useless theory. Plus it makes the coupes look even more plain and generic looking, just like an Asian car! Pontiac should at least make it an option for those that care about the appearance of there vehicles.

Wow. To be honest, those figures are very sad.

Another thing, not a single person would be complaining about those economy figures if those V6s were in the 260-270hp range. Alternatively, no one would say a word at those horsepower numbers if the fuel economy was 5-6mpg greater.

155928[/snapback]

those 4 speed automatics really give it awesome mileage. pushrods too.

the G6 is a heavy car which is why its mpg is not stellar.

Edited August 20, 200619 yr by regfootball

I checked out a couple of new G6's. There was a 2007 coupe with no molding and a sedan with. When you opened the sedans door it ended up right where the coupes molding used to be! The deletion of this is yet another cost cutting move and has nothing to do with making the car look cleaner or that everybody drives an SUV so the molding is useless theory. Plus it makes the coupes look even more plain and generic looking, just like an Asian car! Pontiac should at least make it an option for those that care about the appearance of there vehicles.

182120[/snapback]

You know that the molding deletion is widely welcomed in the coupe crowd? I've came across a few coupe owners who wanted to get rid of the strip, but can't because there are holes drilled.

those 4 speed automatics really give it awesome mileage.  pushrods too.

the G6 is a heavy car which is why its mpg is not stellar.

182295[/snapback]

CLASSIC. I love it.

Wait, let me guess. They would get even worse mileage with a DOHC engine, and a 6speed auto would barely improve mileage.

Right.

Silly Toyota. Obviously they don't know what they are doing, since these fancy fuel efficient pushrod's and ancient 4speeds are getting EXCELLENT mileage.

Edited December 12, 200619 yr by bcs296

We are aware that the EPA is changing its ratings system for fuel efficiency (first time since 1985) that will reduce the optimism of economy in all cars, and especially hybrids?

Besides, the label is just a suggestion. Real world driving will vary and yield different results.

I so can't wait for the $h! to hit the fan. And I can already imagine that if GM's mileage doesn't vary much, but the Japanese competition does, they won't see any positive press.

3900 convertible automatic  18/26

155927[/snapback]

Same numbers my convertible Cutlass with the DOHC got with less power.

We are aware that the EPA is changing its ratings system for fuel efficiency (first time since 1985) that will reduce the optimism of economy in all cars, and especially hybrids?

Besides, the label is just a suggestion. Real world driving will vary and yield different results.

227842[/snapback]

That's for MY 2008. The G6s in question are 2007s.

Hmm, I see. But unless something has been drastically changed in testing procedures or mechanical components, the actual efficiency cannot have changed from last year.