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 Chevrolet Cobalt Chevrolet Cobalt Real World MPG
295 messages, Last post on Nov 23, 2009 at 4:23 PM
You are in the Chevrolet Cobalt Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
I went back up to Illinois yesterday, and this time I only got 32.8 MPG for the round trip. I drove faster than I did last time, so I traded some MPG for some MPH.  Also, I should have aired up my tries before the trip, but I waited until today to inflate them to the recommended 30 psi. They were down to 26 or 27 psi cold pressure. The cooler weather caused the tire pressure to go down, and I should have aired up sooner. Proper inflation might have given me a mile or so to the gallon better fuel economy. The onboard air pressure sensors are pretty accurate. They were telling me that I had 26-27 psi tire pressure, and that is exactly what my tire pressure gauge was showing when I aired up this afternoon. Tom |
|
|
How fast does your Cobalt want to run? It seems that every time I let my mind wander a little and stop monitoriog my speed when I am on interstates or parkways, I find that I am doing 80 MPH. I worry about getting a ticket, and, of course, driving 80 MPH doesn't help gas mileage. These little Cobalts sure like go fast, don't they? Anyone have any recommendations for brands of aftermarket cruise control, or for where to have it installed? How much should I plan on spending? Thanks. Tom
|
|
|
Replying to: tsjay (Nov 03, 2008 12:53 pm) My "ex," the Honda Fit, was hard to drive over 75 mph, since it felt busy and nervous, not to mention a little loud, above 75 mph. It is the first (and possibly the last) car I've driven to LA from SF and kept under 75 all the way. Got terrific gas mileage though! I kind of want to drive the Cobalt down to LA to see what kind of mileage I get. I might keep it down to 75, both for safety and to find out how it compares to the Fit. While I don't expect 38 mpg, I'd like to see what I get. I am liking the new Cobalt so much I am thinking about trading the Versa in on a 5 speed manual version of the Cobalt. 5 speeds are a lot easy to find on dealers' lots these days, thanks to the (now fading) gas crisis. It would be super cool to have a 37 mpg freeway rated car that is (i) quiet and (ii) does 0-60 in 7.5 seconds, according to Car and Driver's recent test. I'd be tempted to outfit it with some high performance tires (in the same size as factory) and have a little "sleeper" sporty car. Unfortunately the 5 speeds are hard to find with cruise control or even ABS. I have mixed feelings about ABS. The research indicates it does NOT add to safety - but the research admits the lack of safety improvement may be due to operator misuse (reacting to the ABS "judder" by lifting off the brake). I feel I can break adequately well on dry surface, especially with grippy tires and the soft brake compound on the '09 Cobalt, but always worry about wet surfaces. There, I'd rather have the computer optimizing the braking for me. Eventually, I suppose, I won't ever buy another car without ABS, then I won't ever buy one without stability control... |
|
|
I don't mean to be a doubter/naysayer, but if Toyota can barely eke 35 mpg out of a 1.8 liter Corolla, then I absolutely don't believe that Chevrolet can magically produce 37 mpg out of a 2.2 liter Cobalt. In fact, Honda just manages to squeek out 37 mpg from their minuscule 1.5 liter Fit model, so this 37 mpg is suspect, to say the least. (And since when was CHEVY the authority on ECONOMY?? Please.) From where did this amazing fuel economy magically appear?? Bottom line: Chevrolet, I don't believe you. I think this is a publicity stunt.
|
|
|
Replying to: cbmtrx (Dec 20, 2008 12:23 pm) Engine size doesn't mean everything but then doubters will always be around. LOL |
|
|
I purchased my 2009 xfe cobalt around 2 months ago. I now have 3200 miles on it and have been waiting to drive for awhile before i would comment. However, i must say that this little car is something else on the gas mileage. When i get on the freeway and go 65 miles a hour, i am averaging about 45 mpg. No kidding folks. I have been on the same 130 mile trip to pick my daughter up at college and the gas mileage is great. I bought this car because i needed something affordable to drive and my only complaint is that the back seat is too small and the front seats are not very comfortable. I really would of liked a honda civic however it wasnt in my price range. thanks |
|
|
Replying to: cbmtrx (Dec 20, 2008 12:23 pm) Bottom line: Chevrolet, I don't believe you. I think this is a publicity stunt. " 37MPG is the EPA estimated highway mileage. It is NOT Chevrolet's number. Manufacturers do not post their own mileage estimates on the window sticker. Here is a link so you can view the full report: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/FEG2009.pdf Here is a line from the report to help you better understand the nature of the EPA testing program. "These fuel economy estimates are based on laboratory testing. All vehicles are tested in the same manner to allow fair comparisons." Unfortunately, perception reigns over reality for many people when it comes to cars. However, EPA mileage testing and estimates are extremeely objective and unbiased. Believe it! |
|
|
Replying to: jameer (Dec 23, 2008 8:22 am) 1. If these tweaks to tires, gear ratios, etc were so minor (ie: it wasn't accomplished with a radical new engine design) then why did it take Chevy so long to produce it? 2. If Chevy was capable of accomplishing this, why are they, along with GM, Chrysler and Ford, bitching and moaning about trouble meeting higher EPA standards?? 3. If Chevy can accomplish this then why on earth can't Toyota and Honda et al?? Has the world turned upside down? Needless to say, I'm utterly befuddled by this information. |
|
|
Replying to: gr00v3 (Dec 23, 2008 9:02 am) Now which engine is pumping more air at 60 mph on the freeway? A 1.5 liter engine turning over at 3500 rpm? Or a 3.0 liter engine turning over at 1750 rpm? Trick question - they are both pumping the same amount of air. The smaller engine is running twice as fast to do its job as the 3.0 liter engine. While the example is hypothetical, this is one of the main reasons that larger engines often have the same gas mileage as smaller engines - because the larger engine is turning over at lower rpm. I had a Yaris '07 with stick and a Cobalt '06 with stick (before the XFE tweaks). I got 37 mpg with the Yaris and 33 mpg with the Cobalt, over essentially the same route to work and with similar recreational driving habits. On long trips, the Yaris dropped to 35 mpg and the Cobalt came up to 35 mpg. Probably because the Yaris was running at relatively higher rpm than the Cobalt and there was more of a penalty at constant high speeds on the Yaris. Also some larger cars run "extra lean" and have better fuel injector design, which allows pretty good efficiency. In my experience, owning about 15 small cars over the past 8 years, the weight of the car and type of transmission are the biggest factors in determining fuel economy. Almost all makers design their vehicles for fuel economy. Compare modern cars with my 1967 VW Beetle with 40 horsepower engine which got between 25 and 28 mpg on my commute from the Valley to USC - modern cars are much better. Or to my '56 Chevy with 6 cylinder and 3 speed manual transmission - that got 18-20 mpg. We've come a long way. So why does the Yaris come with a 105 horsepower, 1.5 engine? Because it is a "Euro/Asia"-centric vehicle which MUST be small to fit on smaller, more congested roads, MUST be small to deal with parking, and MUST have a smaller engine since cars are subject to stiff taxes for having larger displacement - which is why the home model cars are often 1.2 or 1.4, and why the performance models often turn to turbo-charging instead of larger displacement. Once the car is designed for a smaller engine, it is often hard to shoehorn a larger displacement engine into the smaller compartment. BTW, Honda and Toyota upgraded the 2.0 engines in their CamCords to the current 2.4 liters and lowered the RPM, and mileage is better, IIRC. So it isn't only the American manufacturers that "break the laws of physics." 2nd BTW - the current Cobalts downshift a little reluctantly at times with the automatic transmission. This is intentional to maximize the efficiently of keeping the engine at lower rpm. It negatively impacts the driving experience for SOME drivers who expect an instant downshift (I just push the pedal harder if I need it). That's why mileage wasn't higher before - because drivers wanted a certain experience more than mpg. Ditto on the stickshifts on both Cobalts (which I don't own in stickshift version) and new Focuse (which I do own). The gearing is quite different so the engine is running slower - but that means when I need more acceleration on the hill approaching the Highway 24 tunnel, I have to downshift to 4th - easy to do, but negatively impacts the driving experience for some drivers who got spoiled by high engine rpm in 5th gear which meant you virtually never had to downshift before.... So yeah, tweaks here and there in the cars can improve mileage. Could Toyota drop the top gear ratio in their Yaris and improve the mileage? Put better fuel injectors in there to improve the mileage? Remap the ECM (engine control module computer)? Yeah, I bet they can, but when they designed the Yaris, they were aiming at low cost of entry for new car buyers, not ultra high mileage, and wanted the driving experience to be as perky as possible for those drivers. If they "tweak" the car the way the Cobalt is tweaked, they might lose sales when people complain it doesn't pick up as well (of course it will, if you downshift dummy!). So in a nutshell there is a "people" or "sociological" side to car design, it's not purely about mpg, and different manufacturers emphasize economy or driveability at different times. At the end of the day, though, its YOUR right foot that really determines gas mileage - do you gauge the flow of traffic and anticipate slowdowns? Do you gradually speed up when traffic flow starts moving faster, or Gran Prix it then brake hard when you speed up too much? I think Americans have forgotten all the neat fuel economy driving strategies that used to be common in Popular Mechanics and Popular Science in the 60's. It's a "go" world nowadays. Heck, even the "Fit IS go!" (as their ad states).
|
|
|
Replying to: micweb (Dec 23, 2008 11:27 am) But spend 350 miles just cruising at highway speed, and the weight penalty is less important than other factors, and the cars got equal mpg. Even though the Yaris liftback has a good coefficient or aerodynamic resistance.... |
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Chevrolet Cobalt Chevrolet Cobalt Real World MPG
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Chevrolet Cobalt
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
