2008 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X MR: Fuel Mileage Update

That's pretty dismal fuel economy for a little 4 banger with only ~300hp. Your BEST tank of 24.7 mpg is the same as what I AVERAGE in my '02 Z06 with 450hp, twice as many cylinders, and 2.5 times more displacement. My best tank was 32.0 MPG (all highway).

Maybe Mitsubishi should look into pushrod V-8's to improve their efficiency.

When I first got the MR, I knew I was going to be getting subpar mileage until I took the necessary measures to cure the problem. What actually cured most of the issues of mileage was an AMS Stage 0 ECU reflash. For $500 dollars it's worth the price and actually improved my vehicle's overall fuel mileage.
With a small tank and a strange knack for turning even a mild-mannered driver into a hooligan, it's easy to expect poorer mileage but, if you can keep your foot out of it and get the AMS re-flash, you can actually expect to see a significant increase in fuel mileage.

Yeah, its pretty bad. When I feel down about it though, I just look at the posts about the RX8.

Vision7, What does that reflash do to the performance and does it impact the warranty?

Pretty funny stingray454. I know a couple of Prius drivers and don't recall any of them ever mentioning cross shopping them with a Vette. I'll have to let them know.

Who needs hybrid synergy drive when you can have pushrod power?

BTW, I get under 20 in my Evo, but can do much better if I hypermile like the Vette drivers.

Have a GSR...Best tank I have had was 25.6 MPG, worst around 18 mpg...average around 21 or so. Most driving is mixed between highway and city.

The trick to better gas milage is to stay out of the turbo when not needed.

The issue with the gas milage is the over rich tune from the factory. Most aftermarket tunes, add 50whp and 2-3 mpg. I have not done this yet but more power and better gas milage sounds like a deal.

That said, there is more loss with AWD so some loss of mpg is expected.

evocr,

There is a great performance increase as well as a mileage increase with the AMS Stage 0 tune. My particular MR recorded an increase of about 37 HP at the wheels and the guys at AMS are more than helpful when it comes to answering any questions or concerns you may have about the upgrade. I'm very happy with the improvement in driving, performance, and mileage of my MR and, as far as I've read on the forums and experienced first-hand, reliability hasn't been an issue.
As with any aftermarket tuning, you warranty should only really be affected if the manufacturer can claim that the modifications were the direct cause of any component failure (read the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act) but I haven't ben worried so far.
I'd still recommend this upgrade and it's also a great first step to further performance improvements in the future.

Vision7,
Thanks for the info. Seems like that's the way they should be tuned out of the factory!

ecocr,

I couldn't agree more. I understand that manufacturers are concerned about prolonging the longevity/reliability of their vehicles in order to avoid any warranty issues but they should also tune their vehicles like they have some confidence behind their product.
My '03 A6 2.7T ran so rich from the factory that, unless I was at a steady cruise down the highway, it would drink fuel. It was so bad that, if I only drove in the city, I would only get about 400km (250 miles) to a tank but, if I were to take my semi-annual trip from Ontario to Kentucky, which was virtually all highway, I would average about 750km (466 miles) to a tank.
After the guys at APR gave the A6 a stage II upgrade, I get about 500km (310 miles) to a tank in the city and about 850km (520 miles) to a tank.
So, properly tuning a turbocharged vehicle and keeping your foot out of it can go a long way towards improving your car's fuel economy. Who would have thought that an big, somewhat rev-happy A6 can make it from Ontario to Kentucky with 4 people and a trunk full of luggage on one tank.

P.S. - If you thought I had little disregard for my passenger's requests to use the bathroom during the trip, I did. I was really curious enough to see if a non-stop drive could be done that I spent seven and a half hours completely disregarding the pleas of my passengers. We made it and my seats didn't have to be cleaned.

There's more to it than engine longevity Vision7. A lot of it is emissions. The RX8 runs super rich on a cold start to heat the catalyst asap. The mixture leans out when temps are all up (but still not as lean as it could be). A tuning re-flash gives a nice mileage increase. Taking lots of short trips kills the mileage. I assume the Evo is in a similar situation, and living in LA means lots of short trips (distance wise).

Well, I have a 2005 but it has a similar EPA rating. Around town, anywhere between 13-17mpg depending on how nice I am with my right foot. Steady highway cruising is 24-26mpg. Trackdays are ~6mpg :)

Stringray454, you're comparing a 3100lb, RWD, 2-seater with a 3550lb, AWD, 4-door. It makes absolutely no sense.

I do recognize the emissions issue that requires engines to run rich during start-up but don't you think it's a little excessive. I'd like to see more testing performed on turbocharged cars when it comes to emissions but the degree of richness to which some engine run is quite excessive, if you ask me.
Short trips do kill mileage but I'm thankful that my daily commute gives me the option of taking the highway or the city without a significance in travel time. For the sake of time (and the opportunity to strafe an onramp first thing in the morning) I typically take the highway.
I hope further development goes into catalytic converters to enable quicker warm-up times and more efficient exhaust processing that would allow vehicles to run leaner. If automakers/lobbyists/government are so concerned about fuel consumption and emissions, they should not penalize the car lover with smaller, less-powerful, and choked up engines and mating them to increasingly heavier vehicles.