Discussion in 'General' started by seftonm, Mar 22, 2014.
So the lesson here is, if you live in a wintery place, don't drive a Yaris.
Fixed. MPG is going to suck no matter what you choose to drive during winter
Looked at your fuel log. TDI. Weep. Even that is no match for winter.
Wow, how the mighty have fallen. I guess since Toyota made the Yaris a bit of a porker, they gave the gearing the Scion makeover. My Echo (same engine, no drive by wire, but same output, etc.) does 2400-2450rpm @ 60. I epically failed at trying to gather speed vs mpg data, but will guarantee a crossover much higher than 54mph.
The engine sure is a buzz bomb...1NZFE engines have always been very un-Toyotalike in their lack of refinement.
I agree, Toyota looks like it has just kind of...given up on these cars.
15 to 18 degree temps with 5 to 10 mph west winds on the North-South directional drive circuit(s).
This is the 18/23 mpg city/highway rated 2015 Ford F-150 4X4 Lariet with the optional 2.7L EcoBoost and the 3.73 rear end.
Speedometer is under reporting by just .2 to .5 mph at every speed between 50 and 70 mph. Tach at 60 mph = 1,625 RPM.
It does not even hit its EPA highway at 50 mph in these weather conditions. Not good.
Now I feel better about my dismal results. The cold weather HURTS. I just do the best I can.
Like I said to Brick on his new Volvo's dismal fuel mileage, wait until the temperatures rise and so will the mpg's.
Completed the 2015 VW Golf SportWagen TDI with the 6-speed MT data collection last night and early this morning.
Those are some sweet numbers.
Just to give you some feedback, I find the "Speed vs. Fuel Economy" graphics extremely beneficial. Thank you for the time and effort you put into these endeavors.
The 2015 VW Jetta TDIs Speed vs FE graph is complete.
Items of note. At 60 mph (GPS True), the speedometer displayed 62 mph while the CC was set to 61 mph.
1,620 RPM at 60 mph.
Crossover (what speed did the Jetta meet its EPA highway result) occurred at 72.2 mph.
Here is the 2015 Lexus NX 300h (33/30 mpg City/Highway) Speed vs FE chart. The highway crossover occurs at 66.6 mpg. Actual mpg = (aFCD)*0.9143.
Test temps from 45 to 47 degrees F. If temperature compensation were added, results would increase by a little over 6 percent.
Temps from 64 to 68 degrees F and no wind while performing the Steady States in Southern California very early this morning. As in just after 11:30 pm through 02:30 am.
The 2015 Nissan Rogue SL with the M&S 17" alloys performed ok by crossing its EPA highway at 65.47 mph. Remove the M&S tires and the crossover would probably occur closer to 67 mph which is inline with its EPA estimates.
The speedometer is dead on through 60 mph and begins to under report by 1 mph at 65 and 70 mph. 65 and 70 mph actual is showing 64 and 69 on the speedometer.
The strong 2.5L I4 is turning over at a very relaxed 1,620 RPM at 60 mph. The efficiency and low NVH strengths of the 7.0:1 wide ratio Cvt is highlighted within this single stat.
2016 Honda Accord Sport with the 6-speed MT Review - Speed vs FE
Linear analysis indicates the 34 mpg highway rated Accord Sport would cross over its EPA highway rating at an excellent 74.5 mph.
The speedometer is ~ 1.5 mph under actual speed at 60 mph and ~ 2.0 mph under at an actual 70 mph. RPM@60 mph is 2,125 vs. the theoretical 2,151 RPM calculated. This under report could cause some inadvertent speeding tickets with owners setting CC at 10 mph over when they may actually be 12 to 13 mph over (70 to 80+ mph). Another reason for Honda to recalculate the 16 Accord Sports Speedometer and Odometers for the P235/40R 19s.
Picture taken early during one of the 70 mph steady state segments.
From the 2016 Honda HR-V EX with the 6-speed MT Review, here is the Speed vs. FE graph.
The Speed vs Fuel Economy graph shows the 34 mpg highway crossover occurred at around 71.55 mpg. A little high for a 34 mpg rated Compact CUV so its EPA highway results should be closer to 35 mpg.
At 60 mph the speedometer matched 60 mph on the Garmin GPS.
RPM@60 mph = 2,500 RPM vs the 2,494 calculated.
My Fit does 51 mpg at 50 mph, compared to this 50.3 mpg. Also, my 35.9 @ 70 vs this 34.9. One mpg lower than the old model Fit.
Bigger engine - 1.8 vs my 1.5
Lower rpm - 2500 vs my 2850
Bigger car for more aero drag
Not bad, but not great either. I would hope they could do better for a new generation vehicle.
2016 Mazda 6i Grand Touring Speed vs FE drive this morning provided the following details. RPM@60 mph = 1,680 RPM. Speedometer indicates ~ 1 mph to low (59 mph) at a GPS indicated 60 mph.
Temps from 65 to 66 degrees and no wind. And this was the IL/WI steady state NB and SB segments.
The Mazda6i GTs EPA Highway crossover point occurred at 69.6 mph which is a solid number for the 28/40 mpgUS city/highway rated sports sedan.
The owner of another board I hang on has a six and is always raving about his, especially the fuel mileage.
Makes perfect sense. Given the Speed vs FE chart above - and I was expecting lower given the 58.2 mpgUS actual calibration drive ended at just 58.1 mpg - the Mazda6 is not only powerful but efficient too. Sharp looking as all get out as well.
2016 Mazda6 i Grand Touring
Not much available looks better, is as efficient or handles as well.
Separate names with a comma.