|
tpl
|
 |
« Reply #20 on: April 29, 2008, 06:32:53 am » |
|
The Fit gets between 37mpg (lowest ever seen on a sing;le tank of gas) and 44.5 mpg ( highest ever seen) depending on usage. The low number was 2 weeks of cold weather and just running errands around G. The high was last fall mostly highway with 4 up most of the time and the AC off. This is from actual fillups 90% at the same gas station/same pump to the first click. Thats IMPERIAL gallons. The BMW which has a computer. Over its life which for the first 3 years involved commuting UP the DVP and back DOWN the DVP, ie. "against" the traffic. averaged about 10l/100 which is 28 mpg. On a highway trip at 120km/h with the summer tires it can get as low as 7.5l/100 or 8 with the winters. AC on appears to make no difference.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
It is a narrow policy to suppose that this country or that is to be marked out as the eternal ally or the perpetual enemy of England. We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.
Lord Palmerston
|
|
|
|
swishguy
|
|
« Reply #21 on: April 29, 2008, 09:11:33 am » |
|
07 saturn vue AWD with the Honda drivetrain
30 mpg summer at 110 kmh
20 mpg in town
Winter driving in cold temps knocks it down 10-15%.
great gas mileage for the power of the vehicle.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
carcrazy
|
|
« Reply #22 on: April 29, 2008, 09:19:39 am » |
|
Does anyone know a simple way to convert mpg (either imperial or US gallons, but say which) to L/100km? I'd love to know what y'all are talking about.
I use this: http://www.onlineconversion.com/ |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
quadzilla
|
|
« Reply #23 on: April 29, 2008, 09:34:31 am » |
|
2005 Mazda 6 Wagon w/92,000kms
Straight hwy with cruise set @ 125kph gets me between 8.25-8.75L/100 depending on winds.
With roof box add 0.50-0.75 L/100.
My last tank was 500kms of back hwy and 150kms of Toronto expressways/streets and got 8.4 L/100 with winter tires. The back hwy was sun roof open, 100kph with hard kickdowns for passing. The Toronto expressway is usually up to 149.9kph and the street includes a lot of 4-5K+ rpm heavy foot driving. Not the best for mileage I think. So I'm sure I was getting sub 8L/100 on the back hwys to only destroy it with my TO style driving.
Best hwy was 6.4L/100 but never duplicated. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
How is it possible that after electricity has traveled through hundreds of miles of power line then hundreds of feet (or yards) of romex in our home, that changing the last three feet of wire with something exotic, expensive (cool looking, and packaged in a pricey box) is going to make a difference?
|
|
|
|
ovr50
|
|
« Reply #24 on: April 29, 2008, 11:40:53 am » |
|
After 5 months and 3600kms on my 535xi, my cumulative fuel use is 13.5L/100 or about 21 MPG Imperial. My driving to date has been at least 90% urban. I need to do a road trip soon....  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
2011 BMW X3 35i Vermillion Red, MSport
and
2005 Toyota Highlander in Indigo Ink
|
|
|
BradT
Learner's Permit
 Offline
Gender: 
Location: Ontario
Posts: 107
member
 
|
|
« Reply #25 on: April 29, 2008, 12:10:09 pm » |
|
2008 Mazda CX-7 FWD
Around town, last fill was 14.8 L/100Km or 19 mpg
Mostly highway run, 11.2 L/100 Km or 25 mpg
These are with an engine that has not been broken in yet as I only have 1,400 km on the vehicle. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
vdk
|
|
« Reply #26 on: April 29, 2008, 05:04:19 pm » |
|
2008 Mazda CX-7 FWD
Around town, last fill was 14.8 L/100Km or 19 mpg
Mostly highway run, 11.2 L/100 Km or 25 mpg
These are with an engine that has not been broken in yet as I only have 1,400 km on the vehicle.
I should've gotten an SUV... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Seafoam
Auto Obsessed
OfflineVehicle: 06 Black MX-5 GS, 07 red Honda Fit Sport
Gender:
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 877
|
|
« Reply #27 on: April 29, 2008, 08:02:03 pm » |
|
Ok, so I've got a nice one here.
Polo 1.6L Flex Fuel Engine.
Using only gasoline it averages: 12L/100km~11L/100km (100% city driving with some bad traffic on the way back home, 6 km two way commute and some short trips along the day). Only tested it once on the highway, car fully loaded with 5 people and trunk full of stuff, 7.5L/100km.
Now the best part:
Using only ethanol: 18L/100km~16L/100km (same commute as with gasoline), never tested with ethanol on the road tho, too low autonomy.
Of course I've reached heaven doing 9L/100km with 100% gasoline, 100% city driving during one full tank right after an oil and filters change. But I've touched hell as well, doing 13L/100km with 100% gasoline and on 100% city driving. This car is really weird, each tank is a surprise.
Ps. The company pays the gas so any mileage is ok to me, heeheheheeheh.
 No offense intended, but do you have a lead foot?  His 6km 2 way commute may have something to do with his mileage . Car barely has time to warm up,this kills fuel mileage. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
vdk
|
|
« Reply #28 on: April 29, 2008, 08:29:22 pm » |
|
Just filled the Rab again today.... And SUPRISE SURPRISEAveraged 8.9L/100km with a bit of city driving (I'd say 80% highway 20% city). That's quite of a jump from 10L/100km with 90% highway. She's still under 4000km, but at least there's something to smile about today.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arctic_White
Auto Obsessed
OfflineVehicle: '08 MX-5
Gender:
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 860
|
|
« Reply #29 on: April 29, 2008, 08:33:54 pm » |
|
Less than 4,000 kms in the car.
Averaging 9.4 L/100 kms in pure city driving, with hitting VTEC a # of times per fill-up.
Mazda3 (2.3 litre) in the same conditions averaged 8.4 L/100 kms, and took regular gas.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mmret
|
|
« Reply #30 on: April 30, 2008, 06:18:22 am » |
|
No offense intended, but do you have a lead foot? Remember that ethanol has less energy per gallon than petrol; 9L/100km with ethanol is not nearly as bad as 9L/100km with gas. This is also why fuel economy drops when you use E85. Of course, but the numbers still seem quite high for a Polo with a 1.6L (looking at the gas numbers). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Have: 06 TSX, 07 Z4 3.0si Roadster
Sometimes Borrow: 11 GLK
Had: 01 GrandAm, 07 Civic
Dream: SLS AMG
|
|
|
superukr
Learner's Permit
OfflineVehicle: 2006 9-5 sportcombi 2011 Volvo C30 2003 BMW Z4
Posts: 87
|
|
« Reply #31 on: April 30, 2008, 08:41:30 am » |
|
John's reports on his new '09 Corolla got me thinking about how useful real-world fuel consumption reports are. So here's mine for my '06 Mazda3 GS (sedan, 2.0L engine, manual).
With the snow gone I am averaging about 8.5-9.0L/100km in all-city driving (the longest highway stint is only a couple of exits).
Today I took a drive down to Ogdensburg, New York. I averaged 7.2L/100km on the way there with the cruise set at 105 km/h. On the way back I got 6.2L/100km with the cruise set at 100 km/h (this is all according to the on-board fuel consumption computer which has proven generally accurate). I must say that I'm very surprised at seeing such a big difference for such a small change in the speed.
did you fill up your tank in NY? it might be your answer, quality of fuel has impact on it's economy. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
johngenx
|
|
« Reply #32 on: April 30, 2008, 08:49:05 am » |
|
I think we just finished the worst tank ever for the Scoob! The typical all-city driving consumption for it is 10L/100km, and we just got 12.5L/100km. Youch! Only 400km on 50L. No idea why... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
No place I'd rather be...  |
|
|
|
si
|
|
« Reply #33 on: April 30, 2008, 10:56:03 am » |
|
Less than 4,000 kms in the car.
Averaging 9.4 L/100 kms in pure city driving, with hitting VTEC a # of times per fill-up.
Mazda3 (2.3 litre) in the same conditions averaged 8.4 L/100 kms, and took regular gas.
My civic si just got 600km for 45 litres (7.5L/100km) on a hwy/city/vtec mix. But yes, even though just 45 litres, that was a $1.41/L 91-octane fillup. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
dorin
|
|
« Reply #34 on: April 30, 2008, 10:58:14 am » |
|
John's reports on his new '09 Corolla got me thinking about how useful real-world fuel consumption reports are. So here's mine for my '06 Mazda3 GS (sedan, 2.0L engine, manual).
With the snow gone I am averaging about 8.5-9.0L/100km in all-city driving (the longest highway stint is only a couple of exits).
Today I took a drive down to Ogdensburg, New York. I averaged 7.2L/100km on the way there with the cruise set at 105 km/h. On the way back I got 6.2L/100km with the cruise set at 100 km/h (this is all according to the on-board fuel consumption computer which has proven generally accurate). I must say that I'm very surprised at seeing such a big difference for such a small change in the speed.
did you fill up your tank in NY? it might be your answer, quality of fuel has impact on it's economy. No. I briefly considered looking for a gas station in NY but I had a meeting to get back to so I just picked up my parcel and went straight back home. I'm still a little puzzled as to why a 5 km/h speed difference would translate into a 1L/100km difference in the fuel consumption. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
quadzilla
|
|
« Reply #35 on: April 30, 2008, 11:17:27 am » |
|
I'm still a little puzzled as to why a 5 km/h speed difference would translate into a 1L/100km difference in the fuel consumption.
Besides the obvious factors as elevation change, wind direction, temperature....I always find that after some hwy running my mileage improves, ie: the second tank is always better than the first tank of gas. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
How is it possible that after electricity has traveled through hundreds of miles of power line then hundreds of feet (or yards) of romex in our home, that changing the last three feet of wire with something exotic, expensive (cool looking, and packaged in a pricey box) is going to make a difference?
|
|
|
|
carcrazy
|
|
« Reply #36 on: April 30, 2008, 11:18:08 am » |
|
I drive everyday to work on the same route and I get variations of up to 2L/100 km based on the computer's reading (which is pretty accurate). This is for a 23 km commute one-way with 90% highway (400/401). The return trip is always higher, going North on 400. I never tried to use the cruise control though. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Arctic_White
Auto Obsessed
OfflineVehicle: '08 MX-5
Gender:
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 860
|
|
« Reply #37 on: April 30, 2008, 03:26:06 pm » |
|
Less than 4,000 kms in the car.
Averaging 9.4 L/100 kms in pure city driving, with hitting VTEC a # of times per fill-up.
Mazda3 (2.3 litre) in the same conditions averaged 8.4 L/100 kms, and took regular gas.
My civic si just got 600km for 45 litres (7.5L/100km) on a hwy/city/vtec mix. But yes, even though just 45 litres, that was a $1.41/L 91-octane fillup. Wow, that's very good! But you get to utilize 6th gear quite a bit; I can't as i drive in rush-hour/hilly area where 6th gear in city will give me no power to pull the car. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ktm525
|
|
« Reply #38 on: April 30, 2008, 04:01:17 pm » |
|
Dodge Dakota Quad Cab 4.7 AWD. Rush hour commuting, full city, max speed 60 km/h.. Lots of red lights etc. 19L/100km. It's a good thing I am only commuting 3 days a week for a 240km/month total. I can coax 15L /100km on the highway at 120 km/h.
Volvo V70R. Full city outside of rush hour but congested. 11.5L/100kms. On the highway I can get it down to 10L/100km at 120 km/h. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
johngenx
|
|
« Reply #39 on: April 30, 2008, 04:53:19 pm » |
|
Dodge Dakota Quad Cab 4.7 AWD. Rush hour commuting, full city, max speed 60 km/h.. Lots of red lights etc. 19L/100km.
Thar sounds terrible at first, but then my neighbours Sienna and 4-Runner both average about 17L/100km in all city-driving. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
No place I'd rather be...
|
|
|
|
