Big List of Fuel Economy: January 2010

Sorted by best Average? Check where you put the Camaro.

@adavis: "As usual, a couple of cars are out on the road or unavailable at the time of this writing. I'll continue to add them as they come in and let you know in the comments. You'll see a couple of newcomers on this list as well."

So, looks like the FFH has dominated the Fit in mileage, despite being considerably bigger. Seems like if I've got the money up front, I lose next to nothing despite getting a bigger, more capable vehicle. I like this!

adavis2493: I have to hunt down a few fuel log books.

@chrome58: Oops. thanks for catching that. It's fixed now.

-- Donna

I'm guessing the list should read

2004 Toyota Prius 4?.? MPG
Insight
Fusion
Fit
2006 Lexus 450h 2?.? MPG
Speed3
Flex
370z
2007 Ford Edge 18.? MPG
XC60
750i
Challenger
FX50
Camaro
Corvette
S5
M3
Ram 1500

Great fuel economy for the big,heavy, fast and very powerful bmw 750i.

"So, looks like the FFH has dominated the Fit in mileage, despite being considerably bigger. Seems like if I've got the money up front, I lose next to nothing despite getting a bigger, more capable vehicle. I like this!"

Well the Fusion is no where near as much fun to drive as the Fit and it's interior isn't close to being as useful. I'm not sure the larger size provides any real world benefits.

It is impressive that a car so much heavier could get as good mileage though.

@firstwagon I'd argue that having a bigger backseat and a separate trunk would actually be advantageous for some. While there is definitely much to laud the Fit for it's incredible amount of space with the seats down, there's far more you can fit in the trunk with passengers in the rear seat of the Fusion than in a Fit.

Not to mention, a Fusion looks more "normal", for those people who are worried about image. None of that subcompact business, which can be a surprisingly important factor for many when buying a car.

@dragonflight, remember the fusion costs about $12kish more and only gets 2MPG better than the non-hybrid fit. Whereas the Insight, a fit based MILD hybrid gets 38.7, almost 6MPG better. This makes a strong case for small and efficient cars, do you really need all that car. Also, Ford is always quick to advertise that the Fusion gets better mileage etc... The fact is that it is no different than any-other midsize hybrid on the market (camry, altima, or malibu). Just my 2 cents, but everyone has their own view and desires, of what they want in a car:-)

djd352:

There's little doubt that smaller generally makes for lower cost and better fuel economy.

Also, the payback of hybrid vs ICE is always questionable. Not to mention that if you were to equip the Fit like the Fusion, the difference wouldn't be anywhere near $12K. Of course, that begs the question; why didn't Ford provide a stripped down version of the Fusion Hybrid (see article posted by John O'Dell in the Green edmunds blog).

Ford targeted the mid-sized sedan segment. It saw a high potential for sales. It also allows them to not directly compete with the established Prius. Given those targets, the Fusion Hybrid is an accomplishment.

If we want to compare economy cars to sedans, that's fine. However, in the sedan segment, the Fusion is quite a contender.

The Fusion Hybrid's a bigger car than the Fit and Insight, certainly for rear passenger room. It's also quieter, much better equipped, and more refined. The Insight makes concessions on all these areas in order to provide better fuel economy. The same things apply to the Fit. The Fusion Hybrid is for those who are willing to pay enough not to have to make all of those compromises and still get good fuel economy. The Prius does a better job at minimizing compromises than the rest, but it's still a compromise if your shopping for a true mid-size sedan.

Interesting that the MASSIVE flex beats the relatively small Volvo XC60 Pretty handily.

... also interesting that the FX50, another overweight beast (what I call SUV's) that can run circles around the Volvo, came close to the same fuel "economy."

"Interesting that the MASSIVE flex beats the relatively small Volvo XC60 Pretty handily."

To be fair, the Volvo has more horsepower, quite a bit more torque, and is AWD versus the Flex's FWD layout. Also, I imagine the XC60's average mileage is still suffering from relatively recent track testing. And the Flex has had the advantage of long road trips that boost average mileage. Early on with the Flex, it only managed a 17.2 mpg average. All that being said, I'd rather have the larger and more comfortable Flex.

Only 21 mpg for the Mazdaspeed 3. I know it's a performance version but it's supposed to be a subcompact. Not beating on Mazda, it's just all the manufacturers have gone downhill on fuel economy compared to subcompacts in yesteryears and weight is the main issue. Bring back hand crank windows!