Last post on Nov 29, 2013 at 3:12 PM
You are in the Hyundai Elantra
What is this discussion about?
Hyundai Elantra, Fuel Efficiency (MPG), Hatchback, Sedan
#116 of 774 Re: Hyundai Elantra Real World MPG 2012 [tenpin288]
Jan 10, 2012 (10:40 am)
The EPA Highway test cycle that gives that 40 mpg number has a 60 mph top speed and an average overall speed for the test of about 48.3 mph.
Incorrect. Read the test criteria: "Beginning with 2008 models, three additional tests will be used to adjust the city and highway estimates to account for higher speeds, air conditioning use, and colder temperatures."
It was 2007 and earlier EPA estimates (which were generally reported higher MPG) that did not exceed 60mph. High speeds, A/C, and cold weather driving were incorporated in 2008.
P.S. Steady speed driving at 70mph or more will rarely yield EPA Hwy numbers in any car. It is aimed more at what you SHOULD achieve at 65mph with a warm engine, level terrain, appropriate tire pressure, fuel, cruise on etc.
My bet is I could get 40mpg out of a new Elantra if I tried, but I don't own one. Driving 75mph I wouldn't expect more than 35mpg.
#117 of 774 Re: Hyundai Elantra Real World MPG 2012 [dodgeman07]
Jan 10, 2012 (12:02 pm)
What I said was true. If you look at the detailed comparison tab on the page I referred to, you will see that the tests you mentioned do change the parameters somewhat, but only somewhat as the adjusted highway test has an average test cycle speed of 48.4 mph even though the max speed is up to 80 mph. Now if that high speed highway test had an average speed of over 60-65 mph, that would be a difference maker!
#118 of 774 Re: Hyundai Elantra Real World MPG 2012 [tenpin288]
Jan 10, 2012 (1:49 pm)
tenpin288 you said, and I quote, "The EPA Highway test cycle that gives that 40 mpg number has a 60 mph top speed...".
That is incorrect. It goes to 80mph and the high-speed cycle includes several starts from a complete stop running to high speeds. The parameters are changed dramatically.
Telling people they have a 60mph top speed on the 40mpg hwy test? Simply not true.
#119 of 774 Re: Hyundai Elantra Real World MPG 2012 [dodgeman07]
Jan 10, 2012 (7:25 pm)
Let me rephrase/refine/restate/clarify my previous posts/statements.
Telling people they have a 60mph top speed on the 40mpg hwy test? Simply not true.
Actually it is true. The highway test top speed is 60 mph. The high speed test has a spike to 80 mph for a short time but is not a highway only test as it is designed to also include some city-style stop and go driving during its 9.9 minute/8 mile in length test cycle!
The highway test and the high speed test both have an overall average speed of just over 48 mph. And the high speed test along with the two other new tests are used to "to adjust the city and highway estimates to account for higher speeds, air conditioning use, and colder temperatures" per the EPA.
The point I am trying to bring out is that given these EPA testing parameters, it is unlikely for anyone to expect their Elantra, or any car for that matter, to get the EPA highway mileage figure when they are driving for an extended highway stretch at speeds in excess of posted speed limits. If their average speed (not top speed) for their commute exceeds the EPA average of 48 mph by a significant amount, say by averaging 70-80 mph for 10, 20, 30 miles or more due to traffic, their fuel mileage will suffer. It's just simple physics.
What I would really like the EPA to do is come up with a testing methodology closer to what Backy usually advocates for people to try. Do an extended drive at a steady state in two directions and then check mileage. It might surprise many a person!
#120 of 774 Re: Hyundai Elantra Real World MPG 2012 [tenpin288]
Jan 11, 2012 (6:12 am)
Actually it is true. The highway test top speed is 60 mph.
You need to re-read the EPA test critieria. The new EPA (in 2008) hwy numbers don't only include the hwy portion of the test. That's why they are (usually) much lower than the pre-2008 numbers that ONLY included the Hwy test you cite. The testing takes into account various factors to allow for high speed driving over long distances. That's what EPA Hwy numbers are supposed to reflect, not short commutes under 10 miles.
Most people can easily hit the EPA Hwy numbers driving 65 to 70mph on the highway. I'm basing this on actual drivers and actual cars; me, friends, family, acquaintances, etc. The EPA Hwy numbers were revised (usually 10% or more downward) after the Hwy only portion you cite was modified to reflect the other test critieria.
Again, most drivers easily hit the EPA Hwy numbers these days if driving 70 mph or less on over-the-road type driving. I'll quit beating the dead horse now. If you still think the Elantra's EPA 40 mpg Hwy estimate was obtained at under 60 mph, so be it. You're wrong.
#121 of 774 Highwar results in real world
Jan 11, 2012 (7:23 am)
Elantra owners should get to know their cars well at highway speeds. By this I mean study the speed, tachometer reading, and achieved fuel economy. Compare tach readings at 60 mph, 65, 70, and 75. Obviously, the higher the speed the higher the RPMs and the lower the FE. Max highway fuel economy is usually in the 60-65 mph steady state range. My recent longer trip was mostly (about 90%) at 70 mph using active Eco and cruise and I achieved nearly 37 mpg. A shorter one, that had some city driving but was nearly 80% 62 mph interstate with Eco and cruise achieved 38 mpg. Both on 87 octane non-ethanol.
#122 of 774 Very dissapointed
Jan 13, 2012 (6:20 am)
I have my 2011 Elantra for a month now and all I can say is I'm very dissapointed. I've been driving a 2009 Corolla for the last 3 years averaging 28-30 miles a gal, but with this Elantra only 24-25 mpg. It has only 900 miles on it but I just can't see more than a few miles improvement. The reason I went with the Elantra is for the gas mileage, I don't see how they can claim 29/40, it's not even close. I thought I would average at least 31mpg, it's still new so I'm gonna be patient.
#123 of 774 A Hyundai explanation regarding city FE
Jan 14, 2012 (7:04 am)
Check out the link to the interesting Ward's article that is on the new "Hyundai Car of the Year" forum. This excerpt caught my eye:
"Typically, what we find is these are urban drivers who have a lot of time, much more time than they realize, just sitting and idling at a stop sign,” Krafcik says. “When we show them that’s much more severe than the EPA city-cycle, and that here are some tips on how you can drive the car, the light bulb goes off.”
Interesting. I suspect people do seriously underestimate the time spent at stop lights and stop signs which is why the Europeans are making a big deal about the auto stop/start feature, which I believe they include in their FE calculations but which our EPA may not? Hyundai may explore that feature in near future, esp. if other car makers add to their small fuel efficient vehicles? Guess only time will tell.
#124 of 774 Re: A Hyundai explanation regarding city FE [g2iowa]
Jan 14, 2012 (9:25 am)
Hyundai already has access to the start/stop technology for non-hybrid cars--the 2012 Rio has it available. Also I see the next Fusion will offer that feature. So maybe we'll start seeing it on more cars, including the Elantra, in the near future.
It would be interesting I think for Hyundai to offer a "high FE" version of the Elantra with the 1.6L GDI engine with auto stop/start--which is what the Rio has now. IMO 138 hp is plenty for a car of the Elantra's size and weight--it's the same or a little more than the Elantra has offered prior to the 2011 MY, and I think the 2011-12 Elantra is a little lighter than the previous two generations (mostly because the cast iron block Beta engine is gone).
Then they could also offer a sport version of the Elantra (maybe in the new coupe) with the new ~200 hp 1.6L turbo that's going into the Veloster, for those who want to go fast in their Elantras.
Jan 14, 2012 (5:27 pm)
I just drove about 60 miles (2x30) and I averaged 30.4.
I used cruise at 65.
There is no way this car can even sniff 40. It was a struggle to get 30.
It looks like for every 1 person able to get 40 there are 4 other that don't come close. I'd say there is a manufacturing issue or just false claims.
I will be probably be filing a complaint soon.