Real-world mileage =/= Estimates (news/opinion)

[niky]

Since I'm in the thread-posting mood today, and I found this funny:
http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1127852006

No duh. I think everyone else knew this back... when? the seventies?

And the Prius doesn't hit its estimated mileage? Double duh.

I've heard the complaint that the new Civic is more frugal than the Fit, but I've seen one far exceed its quoted economy figures, while the other? Not yet.

But it brings up something interesting... how many people here have actually hit their quoted EPA highway economy, and how many have actually exceeded it?

 

[Wolfe]

My BMW is rated at 23 city/29 highway. I regularly get 27-30 city.

I actually get 25-27 highway because of my lead foot.

This website is a good resource for EPA mileage ratings for cars as old as 1985.

 

[niky]

So far as I can tell, I've only hit 32 once, and that's on a 300 mile trip. (my car's 24/32)

And my average in traffic is about 18-20 mpg. I only get 24 when I'm being really nice and it's a weekend.

My cousin's Honda 1.3, however, we got up to 54 mpg (American) in traffic. Granted, that was slow driving, but we weren't actually being overtaken by pedestrians, we had the AC on, and we topped out at 40 mph. Suffice to say, I'm sufficiently jealous to actually consider buying one of those ugly sumbiches.

 

[1X83Z]

But it brings up something interesting... how many people here have actually hit their quoted EPA highway economy, and how many have actually exceeded it?

None. To both. But what's funny is that owners - of ALL cars - will tell you they have. Which is total crap, because not only would you have to be driving so conservatively you shouldn't be allowed on roads, you'd also have to not be using stuff like air-con. Even the EPA admits its tests are ****, and are just there for comparison purposes (which, by the way, they're great for).

 

[Famine]

My long-trip mileage with 95RON peaks at 38.1mpg (just over 39mpg with 98RON, but I can't remember any nearer than that). My in-town average is 32mpg. This works out at a combined 35mpg.

MX-3 1.8i V6 - MPG: 34

Of course, this isn't "EPA" economy, and it's Imperial gallons, not US ones.

On the other hand, my going-to-work-in-the-morning, 6-miles-engine-not-warmed-before-it's-off average is 22mpg.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

I tend to work on the "city" figure as being closest to the mark. I'm getting 32-34mpg in our 1.8 Focus.

Doug is right in that owners will quote you a mileage figure that they think they're getting, but they do this without reference to the type of driving that they do. In other words, they'll fill up, drive 300 miles on a motorway, and then fill again, and say "Oh, I get 40mpg", completely failing to take into account that most of the time they're in the car they're in stop-start commuter traffic doing roughly half that.

Very few people are sufficiently anally retentive to maintain long-term logs of fuel/mileage.

 

[Wolfe]

None. To both. But what's funny is that owners - of ALL cars - will tell you they have. Which is total crap, because not only would you have to be driving so conservatively you shouldn't be allowed on roads, you'd also have to not be using stuff like air-con. Even the EPA admits its tests are ****, and are just there for comparison purposes (which, by the way, they're great for).

I agree -- most cars have EPA mileage ratings that are exaggerated quite a bit. However, I am telling the truth with my car. I never use air-conditioning because my compressor needs a recharge and I'd have to convert it to the new stuff -- and that costs too much to be worth it -- and I can get 26-28 mpg around town even if I floor it once or twice a day.

If you really want me to, I can take a picture of my tripometer and receipt at my next fill-up. And I definitely haven't been driving conservatively on this tank...in fact, I hit 95mph a couple of times today while in a rush to get somewhere. I'll probably end up getting 26mpg or so.

 

[Famine]

Very few people are sufficiently anally retentive to maintain long-term logs of fuel/mileage.

*awkwardly clears throat*

 

[Wolfe]

*awkwardly clears throat*

I always use my tripometer to see how far I've made it on each tank. Most of the time I'll take the receipt, write the tripometer number on it, and then check out how well my car did on the calculator at home, but sometimes I'm just too lazy to be bothered.

I don't keep a long-term log, however.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

*awkwardly clears throat*

Not only did I do it for a year, but I posted it on the internet!!!

And, I might start doing it again soon.

 

[Famine]

I have an Excel file... I just plug in the mileage, cost of petrol and unit price - it throws out mpg, mpl, km/l, l/km and ppm.

 

[1X83Z]

Of course, this isn't "EPA" economy, and it's Imperial gallons, not US ones.

In fact, your 42 US mpg beats the combined EPA rating of 26mpg by about 60%. You should write to someone at Mazda.

I agree -- most cars have EPA mileage ratings that are exaggerated quite a bit. However, I am telling the truth with my car.

My statement was intended to be and is an absurd overgeneralization. There are people who achieve their EPA ratings. But for the majority of people, those ratings are an untouchable goal, despite what they might describe to other people. (typically the ratings are used in defense - like "yeah I got a Suburban but it gets 20mpg!)

 

[Famine]

In fact, your 42 US mpg beats the combined EPA rating of 26mpg by about 60%. You should write to someone at Mazda.

Or at EPA. Or your maths teacher.

 

[daan]

Very few people are sufficiently anally retentive to maintain long-term logs of fuel/mileage.

*awkwardly clears throat*

I've heard there's a throat bug going about. **cough cough**

I've had my current car for 3 years, and I have an excel spreadsheet that's 3 years old that contains miles travelled, fuel (litres and gallons) used, mpg and how much I've spent on petrol. (How much I've spent on petrol in those 3 years is scary! I'll post the total when I get home tonight.)

Parkers say my mpg is 25mpg. Autocar during its roadtest said 26mpg. I average 26.something mpg. My best mileage, 462 mile motorway run to Kent, was 33mpg.

 

[1X83Z]

Or at EPA. Or your maths teacher.

I'm not accusing you of lying, merely stating your mileage is fantastic.

 

[Famine]

It is if you do the conversion the wrong way round!

 

[1X83Z]

It is if you do the conversion the wrong way round!

Totally true. Irrelevant in this situation of course, since I didn't do it the wrong way round. One imperial gallon equals 1.21 US gallons, meaning 35 imperial gallons equals roughly 42 US gallons...

EDIT: I've gone over this and it's obviously wrong on my end - but I can't figure out why. The proportion seems obvious enough - one over 1.21 equals 35 over x, so x must be higher than 35. And it's 42. But obviously the vehicle should get less fuel economy. And we all agree it does. I'm perplexed. Then again it's 4:30am.

 

[Famine]

Totally true. Irrelevant in this situation of course, since I didn't do it the wrong way round. One imperial gallon equals 1.21 US gallons, meaning 35 imperial gallons equals roughly 42 US gallons...

EDIT: I've gone over this and it's obviously wrong on my end - but I can't figure out why. The proportion seems obvious enough - one over 1.21 equals 35 over x, so x must be higher than 35. And it's 42. But obviously the vehicle should get less fuel economy. And we all agree it does. I'm perplexed. Then again it's 4:30am.

A US gallon is smaller. So, assuming everything else to be identical, I will be driving less distance on a US gallon simply because I have less fuel in there.

35mpg (Imp) = 29mpg (US) (35/1.21 gallons per gallon)
35mpg (Imp) = 7.7 miles per litre (35/4.546 litres per gallon)
7.7 miles per litre = 29mpg (US) (7.7 x 3.785 litres per gallon)

Also note that there's a significant difference between using 95RON and 98RON (better economy from higher octane), so I'd assume that running US-spec "regular" would see a concomittant drop in fuel economy to at-or-near the EPA-stated 26mpg...

 

[daan]

I will be driving less distance on a US gallon simply because I have less fuel in there.

[spanner in the works]
No you won't. Your fuel tank is the same size no matter if you fill it with Imperial gallons, US gallons or litres.
[/spanner in the works]

 

[Famine]

[spanner in the works]
No you won't. Your fuel tank is the same size no matter if you fill it with Imperial gallons, US gallons or litres.
[/spanner in the works]

Overall, yes. But if I just put in a US gallon I'll have less than 4 litres in there. If I just put in an Imperial one I'll have 4 and a half litres. I can go further on 4 and a half litres than I can with less than 4, assuming identical driving style/fuel economy.

 

[Casio]

My car gets about 8L/100km however I only really do short trips, albeit high speed short trips. It is smack bang between the Highway consumption (6.2) and city (10).

 

[niky]

This back-and-forth brings up an interesting question, how big, really is a 14 gallon tank?

Given the restriction of high fuel prices (which only matter because I share the car with my Mom and brother on "coding" days, about the only time they don't use the diesel truck, which I don't drive just because I can actually afford not to...), I only do the full tank test every three or four months. And my combined mileage is usually smack-dab on the EPA City rating.

Now conversely, how low can you go? My best is probably 12 mpg, American. Takes a lot of hard driving to do that. Was even harder to get when I did the same thing on a turbodiesel. Who says they're more fuel efficient?

 

[Famine]

In town, my dad's S-Type averages... wait for it...

NINE mpg.

And that's 9mpg (Imp). Convert that to US gallons and it's just over 7.

 

[IMADreamer]

Over the first 1500 miles on my new car I have averaged 26.8 mpg. I keep track in a spread sheet because I am analretentive.

I don't drive crazy and I don't drive conseratively. There is one stretch of road on my way to work were I redline it through the first two gears everyday but the rest of the time I am shifting between 3k-4k rpms.

 

[daan]

Since 4th of November 2003, I've spent £4,692.61 on petrol to cover 32,186 miles.

 

[=V8 Power=]

I get way better. Mine is rated at 21 city, 32 highway. I get an easy 25 in the city and about 31 on highway. I love V6's cuz they have just enough power and they don't kill ya on gas.

 

[Wolfe]

I get way better. Mine is rated at 21 city, 32 highway. I get an easy 25 in the city and about 31 on highway. I love V6's cuz they have just enough power and they don't kill ya on gas.

But they don't sound nearly as cool as inline-6's and they need balancing shafts to run smoothly.

 

[Tornado]

My father's car averages 40, which is two over the EPA highway figures. His city figures are 3 over, at 32. Then again, he did free up the exhaust system, so maybe that effects it.
My car get's below both EPA ratings, but I never drive it, so I guess it technically get's either infinity or 0 MPG.

 

[Sniffs]

i've been keeping mileage for years...but not written in a log. i was getting only a few tenths under the EPA city even on 100K plus vehicles untill I started getting vehicles in the ninties...where my mileage dropped about 5 MPG under the EPA. under the exact same conditions. oh, on 89 US octane, i was getting 7 more miles per gallon...especially in a ford

could someone explain the difference between how US octane and european Octane are measured? cause I had someone on here tell me that US octane 87/89/92 are the same as british 92/95/98...where I believe the rest of the world gets better quality fuels..and they send the cheapest, crappiest stuff over here.

 

[neanderthal]

mine (1990 mercedes 300E, 2.6) is rated at 19/ 23.

i mostly drive on the freeway (95%) anticipate traffic and lights, coast to stops, rarely use AC, maintain momentum as much as possible, almost never drive with windows open, keep my slightly oversize tires slightly overinflated vs mfr spec, keep the car well maintained, and get to cruising speed quickly without doing drag race starts regularly. these are all techniques that increase fuel economy, some insignificantly, but combined they can be significant. as in my case.

im getting about mid 20s in my mixed driving, and near 30 (im guessing about 27- 28) on long flat interstate drives.