Last post on May 18, 2013 at 11:15 AM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Hyundai Sonata, Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, Nissan Altima, Volkswagen Passat, Mazda MAZDA6, Ford Fusion, Chevrolet Malibu, Kia Optima, Car Comparisons, Sedan
#8065 of 18160 Re: MPG on winter gas [akirby]
Dec 13, 2007 (10:08 am)
And for comparison purposes it doesn't matter whether you use the old or new ratings - the differences are the same.
The old EPA rating for our 2007 SEL AWD Fusion, 3.0-liter, 221-horsepower, Duratec V6 with 6-speed automatic tranny was 19 city/26 highway while the revised estimate is 17 mpg city and 24 highway.
We have taken only two 340-mile trips with it. The first, with about 1,500 miles on the odometer, resulted in 24 mpg going and 26 mpg returning. The second, this past Thanksgiving, we averaged 24.4 for the round trip. I drove 70-75 mpg most of the time and achieved an overage average speed of 58 mph. This included the time spent idling for a doughnut shop stop and the slow downs for seven tolls.
That the car will deliver the EPA estimate is somewhat reassuring, as in "there is nothing 'wrong' with the car." Would I like for the mileage to be higher? Absolutely.
In-city experiences are a different ball game. For the first 1,500-2,000 miles the car would do no better than 13 mpg (an unlucky number?) and gradually improved to 14.8 mpg. The fuel efficiency has improved ever so slightly as the mileage has increased. The best has been 16.4 mpg.
The Ford on-board computer compares favorably with the old-fashioned divide the number of gallons used into the number of miles traveled. There is usually a .5 to 1 mpg difference, on the optimistic side.
Our terrain is as flat as a pool table. We are 50 feet above sea level. The tires are slightly over-inflated. My wife and I are gentle drivers. I have tried different brands of 87-octane gas (the recommended fuel). My wife's "commute" is about four miles and the in-city driving is 90 percent short hops, not bumper-to-bumper but definitely stop-n-go.
It makes me feel happier with the car knowing that it is only "supposed" to get 17 mpg in city driving as opposed to 19. Naturally I would be a lot happier if it delivered 20 mpg in city driving but it just ain't gonna happen.
It is good, I suppose, that we have only put about 6,000 miles on the Fusion during the first year of ownership.
Our next car, if there ever is one, will be a high gasoline mileage sedan of some sort. In retrospect, we should have ordered an SEL FWD Fusion with the 2.3-liter I4 160-horsepower engine with a 5-speed manual or 5-speed automatic. That would have lowered the MSRP considerably and been a big plus at the gas pump.
I no longer crave "Zoom-Zoom" cars and while driving a stick shift can be fun at times it is also an inconvenience. There is very little mileage difference these days between a stick and a slush box.
We really do like our Fusion, everything about it (mostly) except for the in-city gas mileage. Slight negatives include a rather large turning radius, poor rear visibility and very expensive Michelin 225-50R-17 tires. I am already dreading the day when it comes time to replace those puppies. I am definitely not going to spend $1,000.
To summarize, I believe the revised EPA fuel economy estimates are a good thing because they are more realistic, closer to what the average driver might expect to achieve. I don't buy into conspiracy theories involving the EPA, the manufacturers, etc.
#8066 of 18160 Re: MPG on winter gas [jeffyscott]
Dec 13, 2007 (10:44 am)
One of my big pet peeves is getting behind the person who is slowly coasting up to a line of cars at a stop light and I'm trying to get around them to get into the left turn lane. Now because of their attempt to save a thimble of gas, I have missed the left turn arrow. They saved a thimble but I lost two thimbles waiting for the next arrow. It doesn't matter that I'm right behind them with my blinker on. I guess they must have just paid their taxes and feel they own the road.
#8067 of 18160 Re: MPG on winter gas [m6user]
Dec 13, 2007 (11:06 am)
Unfortunately some people are just plain rude and inconsiderate. If you are going to coast up to a stop (I do that all the time myself, in my mid-sized car--YESSSS, something that is ON TOPIC!!!!), at least be aware enough and considerate enough to make sure no one is behind you.
#8068 of 18160 Re: MPG on winter gas [thegraduate]
Dec 13, 2007 (12:05 pm)
I do not argue I simply do not believe some of the more fantastic reports and being who I am I may (yeah sure...may) make a "yeah, sure" type comment which probably comes off as an argument. Good for all who exceed any past and all future EPA estimates. You are helping to minimize the use of foreign oil. This is me moving on >>>>>
#8069 of 18160 Re: MPG on winter gas [m6user]
Dec 13, 2007 (1:07 pm)
Too bad. You probably were not going to make that turn arrow anyway and were also probably following too close behind me.
I'm not generally coasting all that slowly. I do still use the brakes. But it seems like many drive with a foot on the gas or the brakes at all times.
On my normal route there are few left arrows and all of them allow you to turn left on the regular green too. Traffic is light enough that if you miss the arrow, you will generally get through on the green that follows immediately after.
In any case, this balances out by me being annoyed by all those in front of me who take 1/2 mile to get up to 60 mph, those who pull out in front of me and still refuse to accelerate... forcing me to brake or change lanes. And, of course the ever present tailgaters...
I will often get passed by cars when coming to a stop, but assuming traffic allows, they are then very soon far behind me after the light turns green.
#8070 of 18160 Re: MPG on winter gas [urnews]
Dec 13, 2007 (1:19 pm)
by your description of your short commutes etc. it strikes me that you would be a natural for a decent hybrid - the Camry or Altima come to mind. You may have a hard time recovering the cost premium (most do) but at least you'll feel 'green' and you won't be taking out loans with Exxon.
#8071 of 18160 Re: MPG on winter gas [captain2]
Dec 13, 2007 (1:57 pm)
I second that, it seems like short trip stop and go driving are conditions where a Prius/Camry Hybrid would excel. You can also look at the Aura/Malibu mild hybrids, although their FE numbers are less impressive.
#8072 of 18160 Re: Old EPA new EPA [targettuning]
Dec 13, 2007 (3:59 pm)
"used for comparison between cars"....not any more bucko. In case you haven't noticed the fuel economy numbers are now part of automobile advertising both print and TV and God help the manufacturer ( and the dealer that sold the clearly inferior product) that doesn't provide the consumer "those ADVERTISED mileage numbers". It is far more now than originally intended...a basis for comparison.
Which is why so many people complained about the old estimates. They were actually expecting to achieve those numbers. With the new estimates more people will achieve mileage over the window sticker numbers, but who's going to complain about that. I don't think the new estimates are any closer to "real world" than the old estimates were. But there will be a lot less complaining. So all the complainers should be happy now, even though they aren't getting any better mileage than they were before.
#8073 of 18160 Re: MPG on winter gas [jeffyscott]
Dec 13, 2007 (9:47 pm)
Well I might have be following close in that instance simply because I'm trying to get somebodys attention. HELLOOOH. Anyway, most of the lights in the Chicago area are now "Turn left on green arrow only". Believe me, when trying to get onto a main road from a secondary road in a case like this, it can be an awful long time inbetween light changes. So, it is aggravating seeing an entire left turn lane empty with the green arrow and somebody is just coasting along while people with their signals on can't get into the lane. Not road rage qualifying but like I said, a pet peeve.
Dec 14, 2007 (5:39 am)
Let's get back on topic, shall we?
I finally had a chance to sit and ride inside my co-workers '08 Accord EX-L V6. This is his third Accord, and he bought the car as soon as the local dealers started offering them.
Pros: The leather seats are comfortable, it's quiet, and the dashboard gauges and controls are clear and legible, as every Accord has been for years. The power is nice, and the automatic is almost seamless in operation.
Cons: For it being a revised Accord, I'm disappointed, especially with the interior. For the EX-L, I expected better-quality materials for the dash and center console. The plastic looks cheap, and not as nice as the '03 Accord he previously owned. The center console is wide, with acres of ugly-looking black plastic. In terms of ingress/egress, I found it more difficult than the '03 to get in and out. It's definitely bigger, and it feels it, especially compared to my Mazda6, my sisters Aura, and the last-gen Accord.
Again, this is all my opinion, but I was surprised and disappointed, and IMO it's lost a little bit from the previous-gen Accord.