Big List of Fuel Economy: May 2011

that's not really impossible.

it's just because the car had no long trips this month. The only way the Regal can average 34mpg on a tank is on a non stop highway trip. 29 sounds more realistic in a real world highway oriented situation without going on a trip.

dracy69, you missed the point. The BEST tank is for the lifetime of the car. So is the WORST tank. That is why the BEST and WORST tanks are the same month to month, (unless the BEST tank goes UP, or the WORST tank goes DOWN).

Here, the BEST tank went down, impossible.

The Juke and the Countryman are converging. The Mini had a bigger lead last time I believe.

no it's the best tank for May if I am to understand these charts correctly

No, its BEST and WORST for lifetime. Compare with April if you'd like.

I want Caroline to explain this one to me.

that is interesting, it looks like they inserted the number from March, it had the same best average in March and May (29.3)

clerical error one way or the other it would seem

every time i see the list lately I'm impressed by the sonata and Countryman. Given the way you guys drive, in the hands of normal people these cars will pull 27-28 combined. Nice.

There you go! Nice catch with March. Yes, I guess its an error. I would expect it to be fixed though.

Always impressed with the 2. It gets far better than the EPA suggests. Best tank 38. EPA says 35.

I always thought that Regal & Traverse are more or less the same thing, save for interior/exterior design. But here they are on different MPG poles (scratches head)...

Damn, it's Regal. I thought Enclave. Nevermind.

I wonder if Fiat 500 would do better if it wasn't driven 65 mph on freeway in 4th gear.

http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/2011/05/2012-fiat-500-sport-freeway-ride.html

LOL on the best tank of the Regal going down! More food for my theory that IL is actively stoking the 'anti-GM IL bias' debate in order to gain page hits and that 1487 and BB are IL employees ;)

I bet the "Top Speed Test" didn't do any favors for the 500.

http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/2011/05/2012-fiat-500-sport-lets-just-get-this-out-of-the-way.html

What the hell are you guys doing to that Juke?
It boggles the mind how a 3000lb car with a direct injected 1.6l engine can average 21.9mpg.

They need to add a column for total mileage, that would help. Looking at these charts you have no idea if a car is new or has 15k miles- that makes a difference.

The Optima continues to be way under EPA combined while the Sonata is close to EPA combined mileage. Juke isnt doing well either. It appears the Traverse isnt even being driven anymore.

I see the Traverse is still listed in the line-up of current cars. So, where is it? There've been no blog posts about it at all for some time. Is it hiding from the Sienna and Odyssey?

Sonata tops Cruze. Just sayin'.....

In the past decade I owned and drove two six-cylinder sporty sedans, an Audi A4 quattro 2.8 and a BMW 328i. I record fuel purchases and odometer readings and calculate actual fuel consumption for every car I have owned. My driving includes local streets and mountains as well as some highway.

Only four cars in the IL fleet equaled or exceeded my fuel mileage in those reasonably quick and well equipped six-cylinder cars, one of which had AWD. One is a diesel, one a hybrid, and the other two are very small four-cylinders.

Okay, I cheated by driving three-pedal cars, but holy cow, this is a bad picture of the state of the art of fuel consumption in modern cars. Even more tidy-sized and supposedly efficient cars like Cruze, Sontata, GTI, Mini, TSX, and MX-5 are thirsty for their size and capabilities. I would have hoped the industry could have progressed rather than regressed. Or maybe this is just part of the cost of two-pedal life.

@seppoboy, you also have to factor in they don't own the vehicles or pay for gas. I have this oppurtunity with my job, and other than wanting to find out how good mileage I can get with different vehicles, its pedal to the floor.

"Sonata tops Cruze. Just sayin'....."

They have almost the same EPA combined rating. Why are you surprised?

Well the Sonata is bigger, has more HP and it drives much nicer around town because it has better trans programming.

holy crap the mazda2 MPG is the bomb.

I just checked the Regal's fuel log and its best is indeed 34.9 mpg from an April fill up. Just a reporting mistake.

However, everyone seems to be missing that it's the rare car in our fleet that's beating its EPA combined number. Also, compare the Regal to our other gasoline turbocharged cars (not named GTI). Is it that much better? Are the others just gaming the system? Or are we not going all turbo nutty in the Buick as we are in the Optima and Juke?

-James Riswick

I'm not surprised - dspite the hype about the compact Cruze's fuel efficient turbo 4, it really isn't that fuel efficient. The Sonata is larger, more spacious, MUCH more powerful and doesn't have a transmission that wants to immediately run to 6th gear and hide there. All of that AND it gets better fuel economy than the Cruze. Surprising? Not to those familiar with the two particular vehicles. But tell the average shopper that they can get a larger engine, an extra 50hp, a good deal more people and cargo space AND get better fuel economy - and they will likely think that to be at least worth mentioning.

James, my regal seems to just be meeting its epa numbers on e85. Maybe the epa ran it on e85

Seriously, the last post about your Traverse was an audio review in February.
Are you driving it or not? That average hasn't changed and it makes it look worse than it is, especially since the Enclave did much better.

Update please.

smilez...I bet they are using the Traverse like they did the Edge.....off doing shuttle duty back east somewhere...

jaeger:

As usual I will point out the obvious:

1. Sonata is barely larger than Cruze
2. The Sonata weighs only about 100lbs more than Cruze
3. Sonata costs more than Cruze
4. Cruze outsold Sonata over last few months

With all the research tools available today anyone who cares to know already knows Sonata offers more hp for a few thousand more and yet people still buy Cruze. According to your logic there really isnt much reason to buy any compact when Sonata is available. I haven't driven Sonata or Cruze so I cant comment on tranny performance but considering how much you hate Cruze I dont believe anything you say about the car. Hopefully I'll get to drive Sonata 2.4L one day so see if its drastically better. Then again, you would claim a 1980 civic is drastically better.

"2. The Sonata weighs only about 100lbs more than Cruze"

I thought weight didn't matter - LOL! I'm glad you are finally realizing that the Cruze's porky weight does have negative consequences. You have demonstrated a rare capacity to actually learn something. Bravo.

Oh, and the Sonata is not "barely larger" than the Cruze - but then again, you have rarely let facts intrude upon your sermons.

And what do sales have to do with fuel efficiency? People buy a lot of pickup trucks, or hadn't you noticed? The point is that as a general expectation, a compact car with a tiny little motor is expected to get better fuel economy than a midsize car making substantially more horsepower from a significantly larger engine. If it doesn't, that's a bit of a fail. Cuz that's kind of one of the main points in getting a compact in the first place.

I'm still waiting for the Regal mpg mistake to be fixed.

GM cant build anything that is the same or lighter than its competition (passenger cars)?

@bodyblue "GM cant build anything that is the same or lighter than its competition (passenger cars)?"

Of course they can - they can build compact cars that are just as light as the competition's midsize cars - and get just as good fuel economy, too. ;-)

"Oh, and the Sonata is not "barely larger" than the Cruze - but then again, you have rarely let facts intrude upon your sermons."

In terms of interior volume and trunk space, its barely larger- I think the Sonata has about 8 more cu ft of interior volume and nearly identical rear seat legroom measurements. Look it for yourself. I dont need to make things up. The cars have similar curb weights and EPA ratings and thus their real world mileage is likely to be pretty close. Why this is shocking news is beyond me.

"And what do sales have to do with fuel efficiency?"

They are related to your inference that no one who knows about the Sonata would buy the Cruze due to the Sonata's superiority in every regard. I am pointing out that plenty of people are buying both cars which suggests your statements don't reflect reality. Hopefully it makes sense now.

"GM cant build anything that is the same or lighter than its competition (passenger cars)? "

Neither can Ford, MB, Audi or BMW. Few (if any) of their vehicles are lightest in class.

"If it doesn't, that's a bit of a fail. Cuz that's kind of one of the main points in getting a compact in the first place."

if a car is selling that means it offers what many consumers are looking for which is all that matters at the end of the day. Cuz this business is about attracting consumer dollars. When there are 4 or 5 excellent compacts on the market and the one you hate is in the top 2-3 in sales in recent months that suggests its attributes are attracting plenty of customers. What does your opinion have to do with whether or not a car is well designed? In may there were about 19k people that disagreed with you- pretty overwhelming majority in my opinion. If only they had consulted these blogs first and read the expert testimony of you and "bodyblue".

bb-
I have no doubt that you're right. But I still think they need to update it, particularly the mpg.

Orrrrr, they're doing it on purpose to irk certain people.

Bummer that readers again have to do the QA on specs/reporting for Edmunds.

Seriously, you'd think you'd make sure this stuff was w/o errors before posting.

@jriz - "However, everyone seems to be missing that it's the rare car in our fleet that's beating its EPA combined number."

Actually that's the first thing I look at. 4 of the 21 vehicles with EPA average ratings managed to beat them. The other 17 came up short. Sometimes just barely short but short nonetheless.

IMO the Regal, MX-5, Outlander GT, and M56 are the MPG champs even though only the Regal makes it into the top 10 for economy. These cars are exceeding their ratings. That the Fiat averaged 29.5 sounds good but only until you realize it should have been 33MPG.

And I fully understand that how a vehicle is driven affects economy. Given the course of a full month's driving & changing drivers, anomalies in driving should even out enough to not be a factor. Especially if you go back further: These same four cars + the Odyssey are the only ones that beat EPA average in the April update.

Will the Regal mpg ever be fixed?

my current car: 1992 chevy s10 extended cab 2wd 2.8L TBI v6 gets average of 23-25 MPG i have decided that my next car will have to have better gas mileage (much better) it is very sad that there are alot of cars on this list that i would consider owning but very few (if any) have better MPG then what would from the outside seem like a gas hog pickup truck. i am especially disapointed with the nissan juke, kia optima turbo, and the fiat 500. the optima turbo does NOT have better gas mileage then a v6. the nissan juke is a gas hog(!) and the fiat 500 for being such a small cheap car is a few mpg of being able to say it is "economical"

i am ANXIOUSLY awaiting the hyundai accent and the Chevy sonic one of those two will likely be my next car