Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Toyota Camry Toyota Camry Real World MPG
930 messages, Last post on Oct 13, 2009 at 4:27 PM
You are in the Toyota Camry Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
hello all, I just purchased a 06 camry and traded in my tacoma, that was getting 17.5 mpg in city, and on my first tank on the camry I got 24.3 with just 20 miles of highway driving, 334 miles on 13.7 gallons, with the tacoma I would get about 100 miles less on the same amount of gas, so if i can get 24 city and just 30 on highway thats a big increase for me at least.
|
|
|
Replying to: bjw1 (Jan 22, 2006 8:50 pm) |
|
|
I've had the 2004 4-cyl 4A Camry LE for a year now and put 6000 miles on it. My average mileage remains 19.5. I've taken a few highway trips, and measured above 30, even at 80 mph. Driving short trips before the car warms up really drops the mileage, which is most of my driving. Darn those ULEV emissions controls. I find that fuel mileage in this car is determined largely by the route driven, driving style only varies mileage by about 10 percent at most. The good thing is that I use an overall average of less than 1 gallon of gas per day due to a short commute. About the reports of the 2004 4-cyl Camry getting better highway mileage than the 2005 4-cyl Camry. Maybe the fuel consumption is not determined solely by the engine rpm. Maybe the VVT-i and fuel injection vary the fuel-air mixture and valve timing, so that the higher-geared 5-speed auto in the 2005 uses a richer fuel-air ratio in order to produce enough torque/HP at the highway rpm to keep the car moving, while the 4-speed auto in the 2004 with virtually the same engine running at a higher rpm for a fixed speed uses a leaner fuel-air ratio because it is higher up in the torque/HP curve. This is pure speculation. |
|
|
Replying to: guill (Dec 29, 2005 1:49 pm) Here's my response to your request to respond to my response to you (your post #63, after my post #60). This all has to do with what has been reported as to mileage on the toyota camry in the recent vintage. So I evaluated what others had been saying on this website. Guill wanted to know what my educational background was, and what I actually did. Below is a summary: My doctoral is in environmental science, I did a master's before that, have two undergraduate degrees, and did three postdoctoral appointments since in various things (microbiology, database management, aquatic biology), before settling into government work: As for my analysis of the posts on this web-site, I did so via the following procedure: 1. advanced search for mpg and mileage in text for the toyota forum. 2. identified unique contributers (24, excluding myself) which met the screening criteria of 4 cylinder camry 2002-2005 automatic (could verify most, but not all) A smaller number of posters had 6-cylinder cars, which were excluded. 3. I recorded the estimates, then assigned one of several codes based on the discussion. This is just what was reported. If a poster began with a guess or spot-check and later followed up with a continuous record, he was deemed continuous and his guesses were excluded. a) guess - the post indicated that they did not calculate mileage. Looked for words such as "gets about", or "I estimate", or "seems to get", or in the range of 26-28. b) spot-check - posts in this category indicated that they did 1 to 3 tanks (at most). This was either explicit in the post or implicit (i.e. "I rented a camry for the weekend and drove a total of [500-1,000] miles". c) continuous - these posts had evidence that the person continuously recorded gas receipts. The poster stated averages and maxima and minima, calculated to the decimal point, and/or provided a list of miles and fuel purchased. The results are as follows: 12 out of 24 unique posts were pure guesses. There was no evidence that the car owners calculated anything and mostly evidence that they did not. 6 out of 24 unique posts measured mpg on single tankfuls to a maximum of 3 tanks. In 2 of 6 posts, the car was rented. The other 4 posts were the first tank driven on the car, except for one post in which the owner drove 200 miles city followed by 200 miles freeway, filling up between them. 6 out of 24 unique posts appeared to record fuel consumption continuously (some of these may not have, and several others may have, but I could not determine that). Of interest, here is a summary of those particular posts: 210delray #7926 - 05 LE - 26 mpg freeway 210delray #7432 - 04 LE - 26.9 mpg (supecedes msg #7926) hank2 #7653 - 04 LE - 26, then 28 mpg, max 29 mpg, all hwy slimwolf #7351 - 05 LE - 26.7 mpg, "mixed" moomoo #7349 - "yet to exceed" 19 mpg (this is included because of the ease in determining 20 mpg, and his post indicated he was preparing for arbitration and lemon law proceedings, indicating he kept records) carzzz #7326 - 05 LE (?) - 23-24 mpg I have excluded my own car from the analysis as it may be perceived as bias. I also excluded toyotaken's response #7781, who works for the carmaker, is reporting here-say from his customers, and, in any event - the numbers were so extraordinarily high("in the low 40's to about 45 mpg")as to bring significant pause to question them. Insofar as my response to the Consumer Reports test, that test indicated a city mileage of 16 mpg, similar to what I get. I've tested three other rental camrys and I swear to you, if anyone relies on them to get 34 miles per gallon, even pure freeway, they are gonna be walking a long ways with a gas can. Maybe sometime in the lifetime of the car, once or twice, but my experience, and posters like hank2 #7653, suggest somewhere below 30 mpg is a realistic performance expectation for highway for this car. It was interesting to compare some posts in which the poster selectively reported higher numbers when they get them (e.g., miserymule's #6079 guesstimate "gets about 32 mpg on the highway", or Ian721's #7096 29 mpg based on under 10 gallons consumption). Last, I noted with interest, wayne7777's #7374 mixed mileage of 19 mpg, as it comes from California (where I live). I categorized him as a guess although I'll bet he's watching it like a hawk. Several other posters, including myself, wondered about the potential effect of PZEV status and potential loss of efficiency. My conclusion is there's alot of "hopers" and "optimists" that in real life like to smile when they have reason to and ignore reality the rest of the time. My apologies for the tardy reply. Lengthy flu/cold/bronchitus syndrome that limited my afterwork leisure on the net.
|
|
|
That is a lot of effort, but the fact remains that predicting/measuring the mpg of a vehicle by a few posts on the internet cannot be done. There are too many variable in how people drive and how they measure. Look at Consumer reports for actual measured mileage - far more accurate than a typical owner can do. They splice in a very accurate fuel gauge and drive the vehicle on real roads with a 5th wheel to determine distance. Get your car warmed up, fill it with gas, drive several hundred miles on a level road without the A/C, and without a head wind at 65 mph and you will get what CR gets (assuming the vehicle is functioning properly). Drive just a few miles in town and the mileage drops rapidly. In my experience the two biggest factors in mpg that people rarely take into account are wind speed and engine temperature (of course there are others like driving speed, tire inflation, tire type, a/c use, engine tune, vehicle load, speed consistancy, elevation change, elevation, humidity, temperature, barometric pressure, precipitation, road surface etc). Mpg on my Integra varies from well under 20 in the winter, when it never warms up and just goes short distances, to well over 40 (up to 45) on long trips with a tailwind. If I was the complaining type I would post on these boards how bad my mileage is. If I was the bragging type I would post how good it is. Same vehicle, but mileage can be viewed different ways.
|
|
|
Replying to: phd86 (Feb 01, 2006 8:44 pm) 210delray #7432 - 04 LE - 26.9 mpg (supecedes msg #7926) Both my '04 and '05 Camry LE 4's get better mileage than that on the freeway. I'll try to summarize to not bore everyone else. '04 LE 4 cyl 4A: Overall mileage from 19 miles (new, with a full tank of gas) to 15,802 miles: 27.3 mpg (15,783 miles, 578.84 gallons) Best 3 highway mileage readings in that period (with 2 consecutive tankfuls): 35.5 mpg (709.5 miles, 20.01 gallons) mostly freeway 34.9 mpg (815.1 miles, 23.37 gallons) mostly freeway 30.4 mpg (686.9 miles, 22.62 gallons) mostly divided highway w/ traffic lights. Worst 3 city (small town in our case) mileage readings in that period (single tankful, but at least 10 gallons added): 22.4 mpg (234.6 miles, 10.47 gallons) 23.1 mpg (267.1 miles, 11.54 gallons) 23.1 mpg (241.0 miles, 10.45 gallons) Since filling up the car in LA and driving back with my wife and son to central VA and then around the area (he didn't keep records when he had the car): Overall mileage from 28,751 to 34,012 miles (filled up today): 28.6 mpg (5261 miles, 184.08 gallons) The trip itself (LA to central VA): 30.3 mpg (3767 miles, 124.32 gallons, 10 consecutive tankfuls) mostly 2-lane roads, 3 people, full trunk, cold temps a good deal of the way, and high altitudes in NV, UT, and CO. Also stopping and touring in towns and national parks along the way. Since he's been back home with us and by far the main driver of the car: 25.3 mpg (1203.3 miles, 47.54 gallons, 3 consecutive tanks) mixed city/highway driving, he's more aggressive than my wife and me. I'll do the '05 Camry 4 cyl 5A in a later post. Only 9400 miles on it so far, and it doesn't do quite as well, but still from about 21 mpg around town to 32 mpg on the highway.
|
|
|
Replying to: phd86 (Feb 01, 2006 8:44 pm) That is a lot of effort, but the fact remains that predicting/measuring the mpg of a vehicle by a few posts on the internet cannot be done. There are too many variable in how people drive and how they measure. Look at Consumer reports for actual measured mileage - far more accurate than a typical owner can do. I commend your efforts, certainly was no easy task. However the fact remains that your analysis offers little concrete evidence due to the many inconsistencies in data gathering. I agree with dudleyr that the Consumer Reports test is a more accurate assessment of Camry fuel usage. |
|
|
2/05/2006: - 299 Miles - 13.63 Gallons - 21.98 mpg 90/10 city/highway miles Total miles on car--3519 |
|
|
Replying to: falcon2 (Jan 05, 2006 8:13 pm) Look in the transmission section of the forum and see the ES300 transmission problem forum and the Toyota/Lexus transaxle delay fourm http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/WebX/.ef14c39/?ed_displayMakeModelRelatedDiscus- sions!make=CATS&model=Transmission As far as your mileage, the driver variable is very important like Imacmil said in post #72. You may be stepping harder on the gas pedal now that you have a 4 cylinder car to make it accelerate like your prior 6 cylinder car. Your 70% hwy driving doesn't tell me that much. If your are driving 65 mph, your 4 cylinder vehicle should do better in mileage than the 6 cylinder. If you are driving 75mph+, I would expect the two cars to get similar mileage. Also, were you using premium fuel with the Lexus (which can take advantage of that) and regular unleaded with the Camry? That could also make a difference. Hope this helps you in your quest towards feeling satisfied with the car or helping you decide to dump the car.
|
|
|
Replying to: lounger (Feb 06, 2006 6:03 am) If you use fuel with 10% ethanol blended in, you will notice lower fuel economy. I like the way the Europeans report highway mileage since they tell you what the consumption is at 100kmh (62mph) and then at 120kmh (75mph). There is a significant drop at higher speed. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Toyota Camry Toyota Camry Real World MPG
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Toyota Camry
2008 Toyota Camry Solara
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
