The peak of fuel efficiency seems to ellude American vehicles

[greymouser7]

I don't understand the lackluster mpg figures listed in this article:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/rese...ve-year-old-cars/ss-AA9fmKf?ocid=iehp#image=8

I think the numbers are off, despite the label 'COMBINED Fuel Economy.'
I have driven and measured a 2010 VW Jetta TDI (manual) & got 46.5 MPG in 'combined fuel economy' driving conditions. {I checked that MPG twice} I drive two different 1991 Civics through stop lights 30 miles daily round trips. I divide the mileage on the odometer by the gasoline I pump at the station (click, click). I get 40 HWY & 30-36 MPG in town with the 1.5 liter stick shift cars. My cars are not that much lighter with the junk I keep in them. The daily-stop-light-city drive is in aggressive traffic in the morning.

I understand that these numbers are advertised, on automatic transmissions, in a restricted American emission standard. Why are the mpg numbers so low or inconsistent? 24 years later I expect much higher MPG numbers with better technology, computer-assisted engineering. I used to think that the Slant/6 crowd was kind of out there in their pursuit of the hobby. Now they look pretty clever compared to what you get with the economy offerings here in the US.

Some of these numbers just don't add up next to following vehicle. The Ford Escape Hybrid gets as good as the tiny smart car or a tiny Yaris?
Do you guys think that the numbers are incorrect one way or the other between the different makes? This is the same basic output of economy that has been offered for quite some time. When you hear those fantasy/mystery stories about: 75+mpg carburetors, secret manufactures equipment left on cars, Tom Ogle running fuel vapor, youtube videos of Americans traveling in Europe claiming that their VW TDI rental car got 70 MPG, British Top Gear yahoos racing 600-700 miles on one tank of gas, etc., you wonder why a 40 year old Feather Duster isn't far off from that article's economy figures.

1. Toyota Prius Price: $14,750 Combined Fuel Economy: 50 mpg

2. Honda Civic Hybrid Price: $12,025 Combined Fuel Economy: 42 mpg

3. Honda Insight Price: $10,750 Combined Fuel Economy: 41 mpg

4. Ford Fusion Hybrid Price: $14,425 Combined Fuel Economy: 39 mpg

5. smart fortwo Price: $7,075 Combined Fuel Economy: 36 mpg

6. Lexus HS 250h Price: $18,625 Combined Fuel Economy: 35 mpg

7. Nissan Altima Hybrid Price: $13,075 Combined Fuel Economy: 34 mpg

8. Toyota Camry Hybrid Price: $16,375 Combined Fuel Economy: 34 mpg

9. Audi A3 TDI must be expensive, Combined Fuel Economy: 34 mpg

10. Volkswagen Golf TDI Price: $14,200 Combined Fuel Economy: 34 mpg

11. Volkswagen Jetta TDI Price: $14,950 Combined Fuel Economy: 34 mpg

12. Ford Escape Hybrid (2WD) Price: $17,625 Combined Fuel Economy: 32 mpg

13. Toyota Yaris Price: $8,825 Combined Fuel Economy: 32

14. MINI Cooper Price: $11,125 Combined Fuel Economy: 32 mpg

15. Honda Fit Price: $11,050 Combined Fuel Economy: 31 mpg

16. Kia Rio Price: $6,050 Combined Fuel Economy: 31 mpg

17. Hyundai Accent Price: $6,650 Combined Fuel Economy: 31 mpg

 

[RustyRatRod]

Ethanol.

 

[greymouser7]

Ethanol.

Do they only push ethanol-blended fuel here in the states?

 

[mderoy340]

Ethanol.

x2

I have a 2011 1/2 ton 2wd 4.7 V8 5 speed auto, 3.50 rear
75 mph, AC and cruise on, 21.5 mpg on 87 ethanol/ 23.5 on real gasoline. That truck pushes a big hole in the air. I think the window sticker said 19 mpg when I bought it.
I would love to have that motor/tranny combo in an A body.

 

[RustyRatRod]

Do they only push ethanol-blended fuel here in the states?

Heck if I know. Ask Al Gore.

 

[DDodger]

i didn't read all that. unless all vehicles listed were tested by same "outfit" using same fuel, the numbers might as well be made up. they prolly are, LOL anyhow

 

[AJ/FormS]

Lets not mention the word; conspiracy...

 

[mderoy340]

Didn't Al Gore invent ethanol?

 

[YY1]

My wife had a hyundai elantra 2.0 auto.

Got 29.5 average.

She complained a bit when all those later to be proven false toyota ads were circulating claiming 41 for the corolla, ect.

Said she wanted something that got better.

I said she'd have to get a hell of a lot smaller car to get better than the 29.5 she was getting in the decent sized car she had (which I fit in at 6'3")

We gave that car to her son, and now she has a PT cruiser 2.4 5 speed, which gets 26 combined, which is the highway sticker rating for that car.

Turns out I was right, and she'd need a Honda fit or a hybrid (with their battery issues), not to mention Toyota got busted lying.

Don't know where I was going with this.....

 

[YY1]

For a while, I had the best MPG ever recorded in a Dakota club cab R/T.

14.2 combined over about five 5000 mile oil changes.

Now I'm hammering it a bit more, and I'm back down to 13 ish, which is apparently still pretty good if you check DakotaDurango.com etc.

 

[YY1]

...and our son and his wife just traded her 200,000 mile camry in on a ford fiesta.

They're not the most efficient drivers, but the first couple weeks, they said 28.

 

[SSVDP]

I think the lightest car being sold in the US weights about 3500 pounds (Mini Cooper & Fiat 500) compared to a 1900 pound 1980 Honda Civic I had.
And I haven't kept up but 10 to 5 years ago GM typically had best real world fuel economy in almost every segment of the market.

 

[goldfish65]

Increased weight might play a part. My '95 Tercel 5 spd (yeah I know) weighs less than 2000 lbs and gets 39.5 mpg consistently. The cars today are much heavier.

Edit: SSVP you beat me...

 

[krazykuda]

My brother tried a Honda hybrid, and it didn't get the economy that they advertise, so he got rid of it...

 

[RustyRatRod]

Increased weight might play a part. My '95 Tercel 5 spd (yeah I know) weighs less than 2000 lbs and gets 39.5 mpg consistently. The cars today are much heavier.

Edit: SSVP you beat me...

Tercels are excellent cars. Great choice.

 

[64cudaV8]

My wife had a prius for 6 years. She got real world MPG of about 43 or 44 mpg city. She has a Hemi 300c now.. 17 mpg lol

 

[stroked340]

Have NEVER bought a vehicle with a concern for gas mileage ever...if its good looking and fits my needs i'll buy it..hense: i'll NEVER own any "rice burners"..or 4-cylinder anything

 

[goldduster318]

I have a 2012 Chevy Cruze 2LT 1.4 Turbo 6-speed stick. This is not the ECO model though the engine is the same, but not the transmission ratios. Car is about 3100 lbs. 138hp. It actually really scoots for that (just under 8 sec 0-60). The car has over 42k on it.

Anyway, the car is rated for 26/38. Regular 87 with 10% ethanol.

Worst mileage so far (including days where it was 15 below zero): 30.0
Best mileage: 41.6 on a highway jaunt in the summer.
Running average is 34.4. I'm not nice to the car.

It's probably the most underrated car out there.

With that being said, I'm not sure you'd get much more than 25-26 real world in a perfectly functioning feather Duster.

I also own a 2004 Colorado I5 5-speed 2wd Extended cab that gets 20-25 mpg depending on the way it's driven.

If you want fuel economy you basically have to own a GM, Honda or Toyota. Everything else seems to never meet or exceed EPA ratings. Ford Ecoboost being the worst.

 

[1970Duster]

My 08 Grand Prix get 30~32 mpg on freeway
20~22 city.

 

[dibbons]

My little 1970 Porsche 914 with the fuel injected 1.7 Volkswagen motor and a 5 speed (4th and 5th were both overdrives) got 29 MPG consistently (it was already 10 years old when I purchased it in 1980). Tried and tried to hit 30 MPG, but never happened.

 

[oldmopardude]

My new 79 Omni 024 stick got 25 city and 38 hwy, as advertised. It wasn't the speediest car, and weighed in at 2600 or so. My 01' neon auto was rated 23-32, but I see 29 city and 36 hwy, except when it is below 10 degrees outside. Regular gas and it does better. They never tested the 2010 Hemi Challenger six speed manual, Mine got 21 city all day long, and 28+ on the road.(premium only) The auto's got 16 city.

 

['73red-duster]

My 2000 Impala, and 2003 Monte Carlo both are good for 30 mpg on the highway. 3400 V6

 

[69_340_GTS]

Do they only push ethanol-blended fuel here in the states?

In many states, it is all you can buy. Reduces MPG by up to 10% over pure gas. Enviro-wackos at their best.

 

[A38Valiant]

In many states, it is all you can buy. Reduces MPG by up to 10% over pure gas. Enviro-wackos at their best.

This, tighter emission standards, and the increase in weight of both the cars and their occupants, is the reason fuel economy is not better. In 1992, I drove a 1976 Plymouth Arrow with a 1.6 and 4 speed. Beating it like a stolen car, I got 37 mpg. BUT, that was with real fuel, no computer, no catacalismic converter, no nav, no ABS, no A/C, no heated seats, no cupholders, and I was about 100 pounds lighter.

 

[famous bob]

This, tighter emission standards, and the increase in weight of both the cars and their occupants, is the reason fuel economy is not better. In 1992, I drove a 1976 Plymouth Arrow with a 1.6 and 4 speed. Beating it like a stolen car, I got 37 mpg. BUT, that was with real fuel, no computer, no catacalismic converter, no nav, no ABS, no A/C, no heated seats, no cupholders, and I was about 100 pounds lighter.

interesting' I drove down to ark. and picked up a 4 wheeler the other day. 14.4 going down there. 13.3 coming back. was below freezing, -70-75 on the 4 lane w/ cruise control set. coming back I had the bed cover folded up sticking up vertically behind the cab,w/ the bike in back. head wind all the way, still seems terrible! 02 quadcab 4.7, never have done anything but batteries-tires oil and filters, front wheel bearings. think an 02 sensor would help it? will it do better on real gas? have found a place close that has all grades up to 91. all comments welcome.----bob