Last post on Sep 27, 2013 at 2:42 AM
You are in the Toyota Corolla
What is this discussion about?
Toyota Corolla, Fuel Efficiency (MPG), Sedan
#420 of 429 Re: recent mpg experience with 1995-1997 corolla mpg? [hoopitup2000]
Aug 15, 2013 (4:38 am)
I say drive the car normally and have fun rather than trying to set MPG records. Enjoy the great gas mileage you get with normal driving.
#421 of 429 Re: recent mpg experience with 1995-1997 corolla mpg? [terceltom]
Aug 15, 2013 (5:48 am)
I do enjoy driving tremendously & getting over 100,000 miles on front brakes.
The best part about driving for me is observing all the idiots that seem to have zero common sense & drive by the seat of their pants. But then again, somebody has to keep those guys at Midas busy!!
Aug 15, 2013 (5:17 am)
Driving smart should be normal, but unfortunately it isn't for most people.
#423 of 429 Re: recent mpg experience with 1995-1997 corolla mpg? [hoopitup2000]
Aug 15, 2013 (7:44 am)
Good advice! I'm a bit confused about the heavy acceleration with manual trannys, but I no longer own one, and can't debate the issue.
There are times that things just don't go the way we want, but here are some thoughts.
I try to keep in mind that the main difference in highway mileage and city is the use of the brakes. Whenever brakes are used, we either just wasted gas or about to waste it. And the more frequent and harder the brakes are applied, the more gas we wasted.
Another common but not recognized waste of gas is accelerating on an incline. Much better to accelerate on a decline so gravity can help mileage rather than hinder.
But we have to use good sense also!
#424 of 429 Re: recent mpg experience with 1995-1997 corolla mpg? [kipk]
Aug 15, 2013 (10:01 am)
Conventional "Otto Cycle" engines operate most efficiently at lower RPM's with the throttle MORE OPEN than closed. Therefore shifting as early as possible with a larger throttle opening maximizes engine efficiency during acceleration.
This is the why the manual transmission can far exceed a conventional automatic in city driving scenarios. The manual also wins out on the highway in hilly/mountainous areas. Automatics will downshift & jack the RPM's up to an inefficient level. (Higher RPM/ small throttle opening=reduced efficiency) With the manual, burying the accelerator & avoiding unnecessary downshifts is far more efficient, of course you don't want to lug the engine. (Lower RPM/wider throttle opening= higher efficiency)
Google "Pumping losses", Atkinson Cycle engines" & Diesel engines for a more thorough explanation.
Aug 15, 2013 (4:23 pm)
I should have mentioned that the Otto Cycle engine is the typical engine found in most American cars.
#426 of 429 Re: Otto Cycle Engine [hoopitup2000]
Aug 15, 2013 (7:35 pm)
I appreciate all the theory and practice which I have understood and done for many years in other vehicles such as echo or prius...trying to get to the actual numbers for 1996 auto trans. if possible............................................
#427 of 429 Re: Otto Cycle Engine [dgcorolla96]
Aug 16, 2013 (2:46 am)
EPA says 26 City / 32 Hwy. Is that about what you are seeing?
#428 of 429 Re: Otto Cycle Engine [hoopitup2000]
Aug 16, 2013 (5:11 am)
Hard to say since I just got some gas tank leakage issues fixed and have only driven around town ad not on any long trips.......I usually find the EPA estimates to be not too hard to beat I later model cars but don't know about this year,,,,,
Sep 27, 2013 (2:42 am)
Just purchased a 2013 corolla in July. It currently has 3100 miles and is getting 35 city 42 hwy.