Ask the Car People.SM


Hyundai Elantra Real World MPG 2012

752 messages,  Last post on Jun 16, 2013 at 12:33 AM

You are in the Hyundai Elantra Forum.

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

Messages Page 72 of 76

#711 of 752 Re: Damn Skippy [eweiner] by pflyer

Jan 26, 2013 (1:17 pm)

Replying to: eweiner (Jan 25, 2013 6:17 am)
Last tank update:
 
2011 Elantra GLS Auto with 22650 miles.
 
Indicated mpg (dash display): 34.8/pumped refuel average 33.1 mpg
 
Average mph: 28 mph (mostly city driving)
 
Display seems to be consistently about 2 mpg "optimistic."
 
I could not be happier with my Elantra. It's roomier, quieter, more efficient and better looking (subjectively, I know) than my wife's 2010 Civic EX.
 
I would recommend this car to anyone and I have.
 
Question for eweiner: Is anyone else who disagrees with you or has had great mileage with their Elantra a "jerk?"
 
I applaud Hyundai for their fine automobile. They have done a superb job.
 
YMMV (literally)

#712 of 752 worsening MPG with new tires by susan2053

Jan 29, 2013 (11:38 am)

My 2011 Elantra Limited never got the gas mileage that was promised. That made me very unhappy but I took the MPG Debit card deal. Then I needed new tires! I didn't want performance tires which, apparently, the car is designed to have. they are not practical for the type of driving I do ( highway....65 miles per day). So, after much searching, I picked a tire that was not performance and would fit the car and would give me a decent amount of mileage if I take care of the car. Now my mpg has gone down from a high of 34 to barely making 29. I HATE this car.

#713 of 752 Re: This Sucks [backy] by roadscholar3

Jan 29, 2013 (5:20 pm)

Replying to: backy (Jan 25, 2013 7:44 am)
Backy - In my experience on this forum it seems that you had great difficulty accepting even 'legitimate' complaints. Or maybe you could spell out which complaints you found legitimate as it seems no one's negative personal experiences with their car was acceptable by your standards either.
  I think my own credibility is intact having, for instance, predicted lawsuits for Hyundai over this issue many moons ago. If you choose to play Pollyanna for Hyundai and the U.S. government I guess that is your choice (or job?) but I think most would not openly claim such a naive understanding of how business, in general, really works.
While I don't (yet) claim any specific knowledge of this kind of 'backroom agreement' between the U.S. gov and Hyundai, I think it naive to not consider it as a factor. Is it so outrageous to suggest that our government might have been lenient with Korea on the eve of a hard won Free Trade Agreement which focused mainly on agriculture and auto sales issues, a kind of NAFTA EAST? Do deals such as this get convoluted and corrupted by so many interests, players, and pieces? Yes, of course they do. Might this somehow have played into the government's handling of Hyundai's business in the U.S. ? I suggest at least reading up on the Free Trade Agreement with Korea before responding.
And assuming we can agree on the fact that Hyundai knew its mileage info and advertising were untrue, do you think they might have figured the down side of that calculated risk into their profits/losses?
Their payout for this lie is so low relative to the losses incurred by consumers that it is laughable. Maybe someone can crunch some numbers about their profits vs. their losses as a result of the lawsuits. I think it's pretty clear that this is a very small financial 'dent in their bumper', although I wonder if they also calculated the anger and loss of customer loyalty into their plan?
One of their selling points was that a purchaser could count on a good return on resale for this car due to its great mileage and popularity. I doubt that will be the case, so I think Hyundai should also be forced to pay out a fixed rate for resale of anyone wishing to dump their cars. At the very least this loss at the back end should also be calculated into a compensation package.

#714 of 752 The latest lawsuit against Hyundai looks for fairer compensation by roadscholar3

Jan 29, 2013 (6:16 pm)

Hyundai is trying very hard to nip this rash of lawsuits in the bud by its compensation offerings. But they fall far short of the 'real' losses incurred by customers. In this latest lawsuit, they spell out the kind of compensation that is more in alignment with those real losses:
 
http://southtownstar.suntimes.com/news/16807685-418/more-area-consumers-suing-hy- undai-over-inflated-fuel-economy.html
 
Monday’s suit demands reimbursement of the full cost of the vehicle to owners, and seeks to force Hyundai to turn over its profits from the sale of the vehicles. The suit also aims to halt what it calls “false advertising” about mileage claims, and asks the carmaker to “disseminate an informational campaign to correct its misrepresentations and material omissions.”

#715 of 752 Re: This Sucks [roadscholar3] by backy

Jan 29, 2013 (6:21 pm)

Replying to: roadscholar3 (Jan 29, 2013 5:20 pm)
Or maybe you could spell out which complaints you found legitimate as it seems no one's negative personal experiences with their car was acceptable by your standards either.
 
Sure. IMO, a legitimate complaint is one that is backed by efforts to determine if the vehicle is capable of attaining its EPA ratings. I have posted umpteen times in these FE discussions a fairly simple process to do that. Not once--never--has someone come back and told us the results of that test. That told me something about the complaint.
 
Why do I think it's important to determine if a vehicle is capable of attaining its EPA ratings, if the owner isn't achieving them? Because of something that many people who complain about fuel economy forget: YMMV. There's LOTS of reasons someone is not getting the EPA ratings on a car. There could be a defect in the car. There could be something else wrong with the car, e.g. got a bad batch of gas or someone tried to put E15 in it (which Hyundai says is a no-no). It could be driven in conditions not at all comparable to how the EPA runs its tests. It could be due to how the car is driven. etc.
 
So the first step is to determine if the car CAN meet its EPA rating. If not, figure out why it isn't, with help from the dealer and manufacturer. If you determine the car can meet its EPA ratings, then figure out what if anything can be done to driving habits/style to improve FE. Maybe there isn't anything that can be done; maybe there is but the driver is unable or unwilling to make the necessary adjustments.
 
FWIW, I have driven this car. In what I consider very much "real world" conditions: in Austin, TX, in mid-summer (100+ degree weather), combination of downtown, suburban, and urban highway driving. A lot of stop and go, not much cruising. And on a nearly-new car I easily exceeded the EPA numbers. And I wasn't trying as hard to save gas as I do on my own cars, as I didn't have to pay for the gas. But put a different driver behind the wheel of the same car, and the odds are pretty good it would NOT hit the EPA number.
 
And if you've read test reports on the car, e.g. from Popular Mechanics, you'll see they were able to get close to if not meet or exceed the EPA numbers under moderate driving. So it's not just moi.
 
It can be done. Not everyone has driving patterns that allow it. And for those who do, not all of them will be willing to do what's needed (e.g. light foot on the gas, anticipate stops, no lengthy idling).
 
Re all the angst about Hyundai restating the FE on the Elantra... do you realize we're talking a difference of one mpg (average) between the old EPA rating and the corrected one? ONE MPG! And that number has been scrutinized and verified by the EPA. So if someone isn't hitting that revised number... methinks they should be looking someplace other than Hyundai for an answer--unless there's a defect in the car.

#716 of 752 Re: This Sucks [backy] by gman4911

Jan 30, 2013 (8:31 am)

Replying to: backy (Jan 29, 2013 6:21 pm)
Nice post.
 
I'd also like to add that most of the complainers probably greatly underestimate the amount of city-like driving they actually do. For example, driving 25 mph with stop-and-go conditions on the freeway during rush hour counts as city driving, not Hwy. This is why you have to also look at the MPH calculation to understand why you're not getting the EPA numbers. If your average MPH is in the 20s, you're driving mostly city.
 
Another thing that a lot of people don't realize is that with the EPA City test, the avg idle time for a stop sign/light is about 14 secs. In the real world, the idle times can be as much as 180 secs.

#717 of 752 Re: This Sucks [gman4911] by ajfinoak

Jan 30, 2013 (9:25 am)

Replying to: gman4911 (Jan 30, 2013 8:31 am)
I certainly understand that the EPA numbers are not promises of MPG. However, the last 4 cars I have purchased (Japanese and German) all met or exceeded their EPA estimates and that is driving in the San Fran Bay Area with traffic, hills and freeways. As well noted in other forums the Hyundai computers in their cars overestimate the MPG by 2 mpg as well. I am not a conspiracy theorist but I do find it very offensive that Hyundai overestimated their EPA sticker numbers and their cars computers and frankly just blamed the drivers for lower EPA until they got caught. I am very pissed that consumers cannot count on the manufacturer (Hyundai) or the EPA in their car buying decisions to provide valid info. The vast majority of drivers are not making Hyundai's numbers (as validated by consumers and the vast majority of car review publications). Just compare what the publications get compared on all of brands of car tests to their EPA numbers and they are always much closer. I think Hyundai's offer of their puny mileage reimbursement is damage control for getting caught. I like my '13 Elantra GT (aside from the MPG) but won't buy another Hyundai. I just don't trust them anymore.

#718 of 752 rickyred2057 by rickyred2057

Feb 20, 2013 (11:22 am)

2012 Elantra GLS 25K Miles AVG MPG 27.5 Seattle W.A
 
First off. This is the twenty first centurey. A 2012 Elantra should get better or as good mpg as my 1990 Honda Civic EX, Avg 34.5 MPG. The Elantra will not even break 30MPG on a early Sunday morning on I.5 at 65MPH wth echo on from Seattle to Tacoma. The Honda 43.5 MPG doing the same trip. Second, the Elantra has come a long ways. Comfertable, decent power, great brakes,reliable. But the rear suspencion recieves a big fail. Conastoga wagon has better. I did not buy this car just for the milage, but was a big part of it.

#719 of 752 Re: mpg on a recent 400 mile roundtrip [g2iowa] by rickyred2057

Feb 20, 2013 (11:36 am)

Replying to: g2iowa (Nov 26, 2011 10:39 am)
I agree, you cannot rely on just the trip computer. 20k on car. five fill ups from same station, Shell regular gas 10 percent methenal. AVG 27.5 MPG

#720 of 752 Re: Damn Skippy [eweiner] by knocker81

Mar 05, 2013 (10:36 am)

Replying to: eweiner (Jan 25, 2013 6:17 am)
I'm with you on that, I have the car 14 month's and still only get 24 combined....I filled out the form online and they said I would be compensated $14.00, what a joke. When I called they said I need to bring the car in and leave it a few days so they could test it out, but how would I get to work? I'm really not interested...I just want to get rid of it..but I'm stuck with a 3 year lease.

Messages Page 72 of 76

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