OK, this is a lengthy subject, but I will do my best to keep it reasonable! I am considering my 1992 325is w/slushbox for the "CARS" program. I hate to do it, but this one has some problems and if it quals for the $4500 rebate, frankly that's more than I could get for it on the open market, especially at this time. Problemo is that, when I check the cars.gov website, I see whacko info. To wit: - there is a line for the 325i - when you open it, you see that the automatic trans version gets a "new" combined fuel ave of 15 (BTW, doesn't even show a manual trans calc). OK, great! Qualifies for the full $4500 if I buy a car that gets a combined 25 (thinking MINI, here). - there is another line for 325i/325is - hmmm...why another 325i? Open it and you get both manual and auto trans showing up at 19 mpg!! One mpg greater than the CARS program allows for qualification! WHAT?! A 325i gets EITHER 15 or 19 mpg and a 325is gets 19 (BTW, the convertible shows 18)? If you examine more closely, there is a difference between the classification of the auto trans as used in that first entry (325i-only) and that listed under the combined entry (325i/325is). What is shown in the former case is a "CLKUP" trans (Computer Controlled Continuously Variable Lockup) and in the latter case, a "2LKUP" (or nLKUP, for User-Selectable Lockup with n (2 Through 9) Lockup Ranges - meaning that this trans has 2 "lockup ranges", I guess). Apparently, the difference that NHSTA has calculated between these two trannys amounts to a difference between 15 mpg and 19 mpg. AND the manual gets the same 19! This looks like an error to me - and a costly one, meaning the difference between participating in the CARS program for up to $4500 or NOT AT ALL. Does anyone out there understand these transmission descriptions well? Is this difference possible? WERE there two different auto trannys available in 1992? Even if so, could one outperform the other by 4 mpg - and equal the performance of a manual?! My auto trans has a button for "A" (auto) and "M" (manual) modes - that's it: and the only thing the "M" does is to hold the trans in 3rd gear. Surely THAT ain't gonna yield an additional 4 mpg! This is very frustrating! Anyone else run into this?!