Ask the Car People.SM


Hyundai Elantra Real World MPG 2012

745 messages,  Last post on May 18, 2013 at 10:29 AM

You are in the Hyundai Elantra Forum.

What is this discussion about? Hyundai Elantra, Fuel Efficiency (MPG), Hatchback, Sedan

Messages Page 56 of 75

#550 of 745 Re: MT 40 mpg test; MPG driver dependent [g2iowa] by crankeee

Jun 24, 2012 (7:45 am)

Replying to: g2iowa (Jun 24, 2012 5:48 am)
We have a 2012 Sonata GLS that also has the 6-speed AT and the 2.4L I-4. The car gets 33 MPG at 80 and 37-38 at 65-70 which appears to be the sweet spot. As pointed out by prior posts, the car has to be in highest gear and the sooner the better for max MPG. Speed is the biggest factor in highway MPG. A/C does not effect the larger I-4 engine as much, due to the larger higher torgue engine. Smaller engine may be more impacted by A/C. City MPG is 22-24 MPG and is totally driven by stop & go and driver attention. We are amzxed that a 3000# car can get 33 MPG at 80 with A/C on and better if speed is set on 65 with cruise control. Elantra is MUCH better in city due to lower gross weight and smaller engine. Great to have a choice. Enjoy those Hyundais, even the domestic mfrs are generating small cars with 30-40 MPG and they always said they could not build and economic small car in the USA. Competition breeds more competition and better car choices. Companies that build crap are doomed to failure.

#551 of 745 Re: MT 40 mpg test; MPG driver dependent [g2iowa] by backy

Jun 24, 2012 (10:50 am)

Replying to: g2iowa (Jun 24, 2012 5:48 am)
It is an excellent article, so I'd encourage you to read it and study how they describe their various test methods.
 
Well, when the USPS sees fit to deliver the August issue to me, I will read the article!

#552 of 745 Lets get to the point by eweiner

Jun 24, 2012 (2:05 pm)

All of this BS highway vs. city is useless information because it demonstrates nothing.
 
What are you getting at the pump?
 
To measure... put the pump on the lowest setting and when it clicks off dont top off. Do this over time and pose those results.
 
I bought the car because it is was supposed to be high mileage (approaching 40). I dont see that at the pump.
 
In six months of driving my MPG is 30ish and with summer heat the AC is sending that average downward.
 
My driving during the week is highway and weekend local. I live in Maryland so I have equal amounts of ALL seasons.
 
From my interactions with others... the high mileage goes to hyper-milers. F-that I drive normally. I dont gun it and I dont drive slowly so as to be unsafe.
 
I am not going to drive like a granny and I should not have to do so to reach Hyundais ratings.

#553 of 745 Re: Lets get to the point [eweiner] by bpizzuti

Jun 24, 2012 (2:04 pm)

Replying to: eweiner (Jun 24, 2012 2:05 pm)
Ok, let's break it down: at what speeds are you driving when you see 30-ish MPGs? Not average, the full range and approximate times at each speed?
 
DEFINITELY wish manufacturers would provide MPGMPH data...and yes, I just named it, so what?

#554 of 745 Re: Lets get to the point [bpizzuti] by eweiner

Jun 24, 2012 (2:13 pm)

Replying to: bpizzuti (Jun 24, 2012 2:04 pm)
You're not getting it. I dont care about point in time MPG. I measure at the pump as in what I am achieving at each fill up. Who cares if you can get you car to hit 40 on a flat highway going 65? That not realistic for most drivers and is quickly erased by local driving. Last time I checked speed limit was 55 in most areas.
 
My highway speeds are 55-60, and generally no more. City can be in the range of 20 to 55.
 
Some of you would argure that 30 is good...but I want at least the mid MPG. My drive is fairly typical so my MPG should be better. If this car does so well on the highway, where the hell is my higher MPG.

#555 of 745 Re: Lets get to the point [eweiner] by bpizzuti

Jun 24, 2012 (2:23 pm)

Replying to: eweiner (Jun 24, 2012 2:13 pm)
Actually most highways around here the limit is 65, and most people do 70. More if the cops aren't looking too hard (oh, they do 85). Which is why "highway" is too generic a term. I hear in Texas the word "limit" is illegal, for example.
 
As posted earlier, MPG can diverge pretty widely between 55 and 75 MPH, possibly by more than 10 MPG. Yet everything in that range could be considered "highway" speed.
 
Anyway, you weren't getting it: you might not care about point in time MPG, or MPG at a certain speed, but your car does. So if you're blasting around at 70 MPH and passing at 75 MPG on one fillup and doing 65 on a flat highway steadily on another fillup, your MPGs could be very different.
 
Frankly it's not your fault for not understanding that: the EPA, rather than guiding people on what "highway" speed is in their eyes, keeps labeling their test "highway" and lets people fill in the blank on their own.

#556 of 745 Track your own data points by g2iowa

Jun 25, 2012 (6:09 am)

My data points seem to line up pretty well with the test results reported by MT, C&D, etc.
 
Just filled up after a near 97% highway driving (miles but not time), mostly with cruise control set at 70 mph. Had 2 adult passengers (est about 525 lbs. total for all 3 of us). Temperatures were nearly 90 for half the trip and about 82 for ride home in early evening, so had A/C on entire time. My avg. MPH was 61 and I ended up with 38.46 mpg. (Before that trip I filled up to top off tank. With just a 20 mph avg. I achieved only 26.18 mpg.) So I now have 7 recent data points.
    
- Avg MPH= 61 and achieved 38.46 MPG. Drove 196.8 miles and used 5.117 gals.
- Avg MPH= 52 and achieved 41.38 MPG. Drove 243.4 miles and used 5.882 gals.
- Avg MPH= 40 and achieved 36.75 MPG. Drove 232.3 miles and used 6.321 gals.
- Avg MPH= 35 and achieved 35.45 MPG. Drove 231.4 miles and used 6.528 gals.
- Avg MPH= 30 and achieved 32.68 MPG. Drove 292.0 miles and used 8.934 gals.
- Avg MPH= 24 and achieved 29.46 MPG. Drove 258.5 miles and used 8.776 gals.
- Avg MPH= 20 and achieved 26.18 MPG. Drove 103.0 miles and used 3.935 gals.
   
I calculated these from the actual number of gals pumped from the same gas station and same fuel pump. All of these were with Active ECO "on"and maximum use of cruise control. Used only regular unleaded (no ethanol). GLS now has 4,717 total miles on her. My computer continues to read high. It showed 41.6 mpg, which was 7.5%, and the other tank showed 28.2 mpg, which was 7.2% too high.

#557 of 745 Re: Track your own data points [g2iowa] by backy

Jun 25, 2012 (6:18 am)

Replying to: g2iowa (Jun 25, 2012 6:09 am)
The other useful data point on your last trip is the 525 lbs. of passenger weight:
 
Avoid keeping unnecessary items in your vehicle, especially heavy ones. An extra 100 pounds in your vehicle could reduce your MPG by up to 2 percent. The reduction is based on the percentage of extra weight relative to the vehicle's weight and affects smaller vehicles more than larger ones.
 
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/drivehabits.shtml
 
So for example if the driver weighs 200 pounds, the extra weight on your last trip could have reduced fuel economy by over 6%. On a 20 mpg car, that's a bit over 1 mpg so might not be that noticeable. But on a car capable of 40 mpg highway like the Elantra, that's almost 2.5 mpg. And note the statement from the EPA re how extra weight affects smaller (lighter) cars more than larger ones.
 
I wonder how often owners take cargo/passenger weight into account when considering their mpg?

#558 of 745 Re: Track your own data points [backy] by g2iowa

Jun 25, 2012 (6:39 am)

Replying to: backy (Jun 25, 2012 6:18 am)
Yes there are a plethora of relevant factors when measuring achieved FE in the real world.
 
I'd like to think my small mother and big 6' 10" brother (the two passengers, who combined probably weigh about 350 lbs.) were "necessary" weight for this trip, to see my other brother.
 
The MT article also discusses tire pressure issues (e.g., deliberately underinflating the Cruze ECO's tires by 5 psi led to a .6% reduction in FE). They also noted that all of their gasoline-powered cars "are actually travelling slightly faster than their speedometers indicate. Our best explanation is their new (unworn) tires."

#559 of 745 Re: Track your own data points [backy] by rudy66

Jun 25, 2012 (6:39 am)

Replying to: backy (Jun 25, 2012 6:18 am)
The Elantra's real problem is city driving, not highway. And anyway, who wants to spend their lives worrying about mpg because of Hyudai's unreliable estimates? Whatever they say, these estimates do not relate to the real world. So maybe we should just drive our Elantra's and, when the time comes for a new car, just get another brand that doesn't broadcast unrealistic mpg. For guys like me who are not into the technicalities (which is the vast majority of drivers) we should not spend our lives trying to "get good mileage". It takes the fun out of driving.

Messages Page 56 of 75

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement