Big List of Fuel Economy: November 2011

Something is wrong with Kia Optima's numbers.

Porsche fuel economy is incredible. Considering how old the car is and how it is driven...

Nothing is wrong with Optima's numbers, it's called "real world" numbers.

So basically all NA engines continue to meet EPA numbers and all small I4-Ts plus the Fusion Hybrid continue to suck. Nothing is new here...

Something is wrong with the Optima's numbers. The average is higher than the best tank.

Seems like, for the most part, the new EPA numbers are closer to real world usage. That is good.

@vvik & @tommister2, I had thought there was something wrong with the Kia's numbers, too, considering last month the numbers were 28.5 and 12.6. But I checked with the editor who updated its fuel log and he said, "There were only five fill ups and nothing looks out of order." So...

@caroscuro, the numbers do not make sense to me, but maybe I'm missing something or just don't understand what is being reported. As I read this, the worst tank was 18.3 and the best was 21.6. So all other numbers were between those numbers. Somehow the average is 22, which is more than the best tank? Are the best and worst only since the last update, but the average is for the total miles driven? Your 5 tanks comment takes me in that direction. Thanks in advance for clarifying.

I reallly love the looks of the TSX wagon. If only the tiny engine had a stick-- or a turbo. But I would, of course, prefer the stick. If the TSX sedan gets a stick, then why... oh, the hell with it.

@tommister2, Ah, you're correct. I checked the updated fuel sheet and the editor mistakenly reported just the best and worst for the month instead of overall as per usual. Will correct the post. Thanks!

where did the Traverse go??? Was it sold, abandoned at the airport or stolen??

I can go 2 weeks and get in excess of 500 miles almost every time on one tank. So I have two fill-ups. The distance of 1032 miles divided by 28.645 gallons gives me 36.0 mpg for November.

October took 28.155 gallons to go 1023.6 miles, giving a slightly better 36.35 mpg. My highway miles, to work and back, are 250 a week. So the only non-highway miles are those above 1000. Highway speeds are currently never above 60mph. With the exception of one modest hill, all miles are on level ground. Were it not for about 20 traffic lights and a few stop signs, it could do a bit better. And my car is a '99 model built in '98, closing in on 200K miles. The dilemma I face is that were I to replace this good running car with a new one, there are a limited number that get as good or better real world fuel mileage. And, I do I have each and every fuel receipt for every fill-up since I got the car.

As a family guy, what I see here is that the Ecoboost fails to deliver in the Explorer, as the roomier, more-practical and less expensive (in other trims) Odyssey provides better mileage with its powerful V-6. Time to pull-up the mpg results of the Flex. Boxes rule!

@blueprint1 SUV's in general are not as fuel efficient for various reasons (clearance, weight). Also I thought this Explorer is 4WD but looking at specs it seems FWD only?

Jetta MPG looks good but on average diesel is 20% more expensive now than regular.
I'm not so sure yet diesels will take off in the US as VW/Audi wants you to believe. Sure it's seasonal but that's still big difference making Focus cheaper in fuel.

What ever happened to the Chevy Traverse? It shows up as an active car, but there were only 55 posts, and the last one was in March.

WHY is the Audi A8 still in the shop???

Seriously, they could've flown some stainless steel OEM panels from DeLorean and replaced the damaged aluminum on the car by now. I mean it was all of, what, 7 or 8 inches?

I wouldn't surprised if they hit you with a $5,000 bill. Did they feed the car turkey and pumpkin pie over Thanksgiving?

lucien4:

All EcoBoost Explorers are FWD only. Same goes for the Edge.

Look at the figures for the Ex vs the Juke........I think that almost 20 MPG average for such a big machine as the Ex is pretty damned good. Where are the people screaming over the 17.5 average for the Jeep?

@bodyblue

17.5 for a street-legal farm tractor ain't that bad.

The Juke's results are pretty deceiving, like the Ex's, so the small engine + turbo recipe doesn't seem to deliver in SUVs in the real world (it did work in the Cruze). That comparo driving against the 510 did not help either...

My best for the 2011 Volkswagen Jetta TDI was 52.4 MPG

jdub53084,
I've seen many of your posts. You might have a point once and a while, but for the most part, I think you should stop commenting on these websites. Your "comments" rarely serve a purpose, and, more commonly, make you sound like an idiot. Take care,
SAS