EPA mpg estimates gripe.......(yes, even post 2007)....

[redgtxdi]

I'll try to make this short but.......as I recently thought I'd figured Equinox was the car for me, I found that everybody (even Car & Driver) found mpg estimates are WAAAAAY off for that little sucker......

estimated mpg 22/32.......C/D observed 18mpg WTF??? (Oh, and I've yet to find any forum member reach 30mpg to save their life)

Lambda triplets ----- (Traverse, Acadia, Enclave) estimated 18/25........most observed 12 to 13. WTF???

Now, pre 2007 things were "optimistic" but I figured post 2007 the EPA had this under control. NOT!!!!!!!!

I don't even know what to trust anymore. I found a good used Enclave that I thought would really fill my "Genesis" dreams with my "SUV" desires and do it all in one package. Well, not with 12mpg. (Yes, I drive mostly city). I can do that all day in my F150 4.6L. I don't need another one of those.

/rant (til I think of more to say)

 

[Ferzerp]

My car is 14/22 city/hwy

I get 12 city (though my drive is pretty much the worst possible for mileage).

I can get 21 highway if I'm careful.

 

[herm0016]

No way they get 12 to 13 unless its stop and go and really bad city driving all the time in the lambda's. I get an avg of 17.8 in my FULL SIZE GM TRUCK. about 50/50 driving.

check out TrueDelta. the gas mileage from their surveys is between 16 and 20 for the arcadia.

For the equnox it is between 21 and 27 mpg.

http://www.truedelta.com/fuel_econo...s&brand=Chevrolet&modelCode=62&session_code=2

 

[TakeNoPrisoners]

Funny, for my 1998 pickup and my 1995 Camaro the estimates were pretty accurate, and I drive vehicles like I stole them.

 

[Doppel]

EPA on my two vehicles now are great. One of them I've gotten 15-20% better on highway figures while driving it on the highway at around 70%. Was really surprised at that. But I think EPA overall is good. C&D "observed" mileage is COMPLETELY WORTHLESS. I wouldn't pay it a damn bit of attention. Who knows how the hell they are driving the cars. They certainly don't run it through their own EPA-like testing.

That said, the Equinox is a unique case. I've heard that its transmission sucks and was tweaked to shift in ways necessary to get such good mileage. But, I've not read much about it, just a couple anecdotes.

The reality is you won't get good mileage on any suv right now other than the highlander hybrid. And I doubt you're looking to spend $40k.

 

[redgtxdi]

No way they get 12 to 13 unless its stop and go and really bad city driving all the time in the lambda's. I get an avg of 17.8 in my FULL SIZE GM TRUCK. about 50/50 driving.

Your truck doesn't correlate. Two different vehicles & you're only one driver.

Check the forums. Enclave specifically. Lots of folks w/ different Lambdas. In fact, one of the guys "encadia" has 2 of the 3. 20+ is a pipe dream.

check out TrueDelta. the gas mileage from their surveys is between 16 and 20 for the arcadia.

For the equnox it is between 21 and 27 mpg.

http://www.truedelta.com/fuel_econo...s&brand=Chevrolet&modelCode=62&session_code=2

Check out Fuelly!! I don't know how many cars True Delta uses, but Fuelly lays it out for all to see. Most of the time you can see how they drive too. I think that makes it even scarier. Are you going to get a "good one"?? For the 2011's Fuelly records 27 E's w/ 404 fillups 7 the "average" is 21.9. They couldn't even hit the min sticker #???? Some get more......or LESS!!!! WTF???

And as for Equinox shifts, they are actually just fine. Yes, it shifts a little lower but there's this surprising "pull" of torque in that thing that just works. In fact, I'd say the most impressive pull is after O/D when you move from the on-ramp to the first lane of a freeway. It just pulls at low rpm like there's something other than a 2.4 GDI under the hood.

However........if I go & spend circa $26K on an equinox & find I got a "bad one", you'd see one hell of a clinic in Showroom Furniture Flipping 101 displayed at the dealer.

 

[punjabiplaya]

moar: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/20...tually-get-40-mpg-on-the-highway/#more-415619

 

[Meghan54]

They certainly don't run it through their own EPA-like testing.

You're right, they don't. Instead of running a car on rollers, isolated from the real world and using a special concoction for fuel (not gasoline), C&D uses real gasoline and actually drives the car on a real road like most enthusiasts do.

 

[SparkyJJO]

My previous car would do 4mpg above the old EPA estimates, and 6 above the revised estimates. I would get 32 highway, it was rated at 28 originally and 26 revised.

My current vehicle gets approximately what it was rated for by the old EPA estimates, not the lower, revised estimates.

BTW, I can affect my city mpg by a good 1-2 mpg very easily. Less use of the brake requires less use (especially heavier use) of the gas, which means less fuel burned and is more efficient. And I still get from point A to point B in the same amount of time since punching the gas to hit the brakes harder for the next stoplight is pretty pointless.

 

[Doppel]

You're right, they don't. Instead of running a car on rollers, isolated from the real world and using a special concoction for fuel (not gasoline), C&D uses real gasoline and actually drives the car on a real road like most enthusiasts do.

Bolded for relevance; C&D does who knows what to these cars. They are certainly not running in a typical city or highway scenario day in and day out.

And a good simulation is a fine way to measure many things; it's how many industries conduct their R&D, how pilots are trained, how soldiers are trained, how cars are crash-tested, etc.

 

[Doppel]

moar: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/20...tually-get-40-mpg-on-the-highway/#more-415619

*sigh*

the answer we’re looking for is 40, as in “40 MPG hwy.”

And how do they test?

a mixed bag of city, highway and even mountain driving conditions

uh

While hardly scientific

You said it

these numbers do underscore the fact the 40 mpg figure is an illusion.

No they don't, because it was "hardly scientific".

 

[desy]

fuel economy .gov has 23.5 for the fwd 4 cyl equinox 'real users'should be 26 by est but not terrible low, and the traverse is 18 which is right where it should be combined

 

[LTC8K6]

The I4 engine is too weak for the Equinox. Then if you add a couple pax and a load of luggage, it's overwhelmed.

 

[dtgoodwin]

It seems the biggest problems come from heavy weight, high aerodynamic drag vehicles. My 2002 TrailBlazer was originally rated at 21 Hwy. I can get 21 if I drive 55. It very quickly goes down at higher speeds. I can get fair mileage in town, 16, but I can also get 12 or less if I am aggressive.

I drove a 4-cylinder FWD Equinox in Chicago for 300 miles. I averaged 26 MPG mixed driving. I was able get 30+ driving 55 (due to traffic).

I think in general the penalties for driving faster than the EPA tests, and/or more aggressively are much higher in SUVs than in lighter and more aerodynamic vehicles. My dad's 2001 Cadillac DHS which is rated at 16/25 on premium (old ratings). It weights almost the same as my TrailBlazer and gets about the same economy in town, yet on the highway he consistently gets 30 - even traveling at 75.

 

[SparkyJJO]

Interesting. I get 18-19 average on my 02 Trailblazer 4x4, which is a fair amount of non-highway cruising at 45-50 and some 35 or less stop-and-go thrown in. If I do all-out interstate with the cruise set around 68-70 I'll be bumping the 21 rated mpg. One tank I got 23, but I don't know how and it only happened one time.

 

[yottabit]

I have the opposite experience... I have always gotten better gas mileage on my pre-change cars than the posted window sticker, and I get much much better gas mileage then the new EPA ratings

I guess it's all about how you drive?

 

[JulesMaximus]

Interesting. I get 18-19 average on my 02 Trailblazer 4x4, which is a fair amount of non-highway cruising at 45-50 and some 35 or less stop-and-go thrown in. If I do all-out interstate with the cruise set around 68-70 I'll be bumping the 21 rated mpg. One tank I got 23, but I don't know how and it only happened one time.

Put that in stop and go SoCal traffic and you will get 14-15mpg.

 

[redgtxdi]

Jules, INDEED!!!

Here's my experience:

1995 Geo Prizm (Corolla) 1.6L........Original EPA 26/30.....Revised 23/27.......I see 22/28

1998 Toyota Camry 2.2L..........Original EPA 23/30.......Revised 20/28......I see 21/29

1998 Ford Ford F150 Scab 4.6L.......Original EPA 15/20 (LOL)......Revised 14/18......I see 12.5/17 (And that 12.5 is hell or high water.....it is like a Rolex)

I'm about as real-world a driver as I know. Mostly city w/ mixed highway (probably 60/30) and while my vehicles are pretty close, I generally disagree with those who claim over 20% more than EPA.

I recall on one trip about 2 years ago, my Camry got 34mpg. My jaw dropped, but knowing that I *KNOW* how to properly record mpg, I can only assume it was a good tail wind going both ways cuz, yes, it was 100% highway but that is the ONLY time my Camry's ever done that.

And, as I recall, Car & Driver admitted that they mashed the pedal most of the time in the Equinox........HOWEVER........there is NO WAY that sucker should get 18 with a post07 sticker of 22/32. It's not just shameful.......it's almost unlawful!!!

I can't FORCE my vehicles to get LESS THAN:

Geo ---- 21
Camry ---- 20
Ford ----- 12

So I don't blame C/D........I blame the EPA and the manufacturer.

 

[ThatsABigOne]

Thanks for making this thread OP. I was also wondering about EPA and Manufacturer's ratings.

My 1998 Acura 3.5RL is rated 17/23 (pre 2007 EPA revision)
But so far, I have been getting on average 24.6-24.8 MPG with 70 highway and 30 city driving. And I drive the car like it is stolen sometimes...

 

[Jumpem]

It all depends on how you drive, and the type of driving your commute covers.

At my old house, my commute was mostly highways and rural roads. I got 30mpg in my Outback. Now I do alot of suburban driving, and it's gone down to 25mpg.

 

[herm0016]

some of this is LULZ.

I believe it to be the drivers and maintenance issues for the most part. Drive like a maniac and get bad mileage. drive like a grandma and get great mileage.

like most enthusiasts do.

what you mean is "like an idiot" or "mash the gas and break" ?
an "enthusiast" should mean someone who loves driving and can enjoy driving low stress and easy on the pedals just as much as a track day because they know the wear and stress they are subjecting their machines to.

If you actually look at TrueDelta you can see the results from every result they have for that car and driving habits, road conditions.

everyone should check out fuelly! i did not see one lambda that was 12mpg.... looks like the equinox does much better than 18 most of the time too.

lulz!

 

[rdp6]

2007 Passat 2.0T 6M: fueleconomy.gov shows 21/29. I drive highway exclusively and fill up with 93 octane. Winter gas: ~31.5mpg. Summer gas: 33mpg.

I rev the piss out of it at every opportunity. Average speed for the 46 mile commute (each way, includes all stops and idling before leaving the driveway / parking lot) is 60mph during the summer. Fuel economy has been consistent for since break-in. Currently at 100.7K miles. EDIT: still on the original brakes, so my datapoint is likely an outlier.

Fuel economy sticker for the 2011 Ecoboost Flex reports 16/21. This vehicle doesn't get the same use as the Passat. Commute is 80/20 highway/city. Saw 17 mpg at purchase (brand-new), and have been seeing ~20.2 mpg since about 6K miles. Currently at 8.2K miles, hope economy improves to at least 21mpg. I don't drive it often, but when I do I am certain to give it the Italian tune-up. The wife is much easier on the gas but has commented that she likes how it is quick.

 

[ShawnD1]

Funny, for my 1998 pickup and my 1995 Camaro the estimates were pretty accurate, and I drive vehicles like I stole them.

True that. My current car was exceeding the estimates up until the transmission started having problems. Only then did it fall below the estimates by a significant amount.

 

[DVad3r]

I actually find the Canadian EPA estimates to be more accurate than the US ones.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/

vs

http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/transportation/tools/compare/compare-search-one.cfm


For example my car:

2001 Lexus ES 300
Automatic 4-spd
6 Cylinders
3.0 Liters
Regular Gasoline

Their rating is 17/24 and the original sticker is 19/26

From my own calculations the actual mileage is closer to the original sticker. I can even get 27 mpg highway.

It's frustrating, I find a lot of cars aren't listed accurately.

 

[Kroze]

brands you can trust are Honda & Toyota.