When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
If that is accurate, Buick has a bone to pick with the EPA.
Probably more than just Buick. My brother's Kia Seltos SX, with a slightly larger 1.6L -turbo-4 and AWD, is rated 27 on the highway...he gets around 42 or so under the same conditions I did today...moderate cruise at the limit, lightly loaded. He and I are both conservative drivers, though, and generally light with the right foot.
In most local stop and go driving, however, I DO get just about what the EPA rates....mid 20s or so. So does my brother. It's only on certain Interstate highways where I do much better.
He was not even on the Interstate. He said he stopped at gas station
Read what I said, Jill. I pulled off the highway, stopped at a nearby station only two blocks away, and took the shot. For safety reasons, I usually don't fool with hand-held cell phones while I'm in motion.
Personally I’m still not buying it. C&D got just over 30 MPG on their 75 MPG test loop. I don’t see how it’s possible you’re getting 80% better fuel economy going 55.
Right, so Marshall claim is pointless... Why not just post the lifetime average? Problem solved. Finding the perfect scenario to game the claim EPA is exceeded is useless info. He doesn’t even have a full tank of gas which the EPA starts with…
Why are you so outraged by his results? He probably is right at the perfect speed the turbo is not on boost at all and it's just the engine working.
Highway speed is actually really close to what he was at vs the rest of us who drive much faster, and he is in steady state
New Buick Encore GX Bought a new 2021 Buick Encore for my wife today. It's
FWD with the base 1.2 liter 137 hp engine and CVT. I first drove it around town for 8.5 miles. Two stops, too many red lights, temperature 35 degrees, and the
salesman had switched off the automatic engine stop.
The display showed 34 MPG. I estimate about 36 MPG
if the auto stop had been enabled. Then drove it home at 57-58 MPH (55 speed limit) against a light headwind. Total distance today 72.0
miles, total MPG 39.1. It will be a while before I get to drive it again, but I did notice that this vehicle really responds to DWL. An acceleration burst to 5000 RPM dropped the trip MPG in only a couple of seconds. The RPM was generally 2000 to 2400 at 57-58 MPH depending on grade and local
wind.
EDIT: The temperature was 35 deg F.
Apples and oranges compared to my conditions today. First, the temperature was about 85 degrees in stead of just above freezing...all else equal, cold temps drop MPG significantly. Second, I was running about 1600-1700 RPM instead of 2000-2400......this 1.3L engine's torque peak is at 1700-1800, so it is running in its most efficient range for a light-throttle setting. Second, I was on level pavement, not hilly like described above.
Then explain why I have done much better than Highway-EPA for most of the modern vehicles I've owned. Hypermills or not, the EPA highway tests simply are not simulating the same conditions I drive under.
Personally I’m still not buying it. C&D got just over 30 MPG on their 75 MPG test loop. I don’t see how it’s possible you’re getting 80% better fuel economy going 55.
idk man... sounds like mike is just the better driver of you two
Not doubting anyone but will observe that one way measurements are very susceptible to things like elevation changes etc skewing the results, a round trip with the same routing and consistent speeds in both direction is a better indication of the actual average.
Case in point, for some reason I can’t quite fathom we always seem to get much better mileage on our trips home from Lake Tahoe than we ever do on the way there…
Then explain why I have done much better than Highway-EPA for most of the modern vehicles I've owned. Hypermills or not, the EPA highway tests simply are not simulating the same conditions I drive under.
There us doing much better and overperforming what everybody else gets by 80%. This is either a malfunctioning trip computer or its the specific best route for hypermiling, downhill etc. I'm not doubting your display is saying that, but I am still doubting the concept that you can "get 50 MPG on the highway" in an Encore GX.
Originally Posted by swajames
Not doubting anyone but will observe that one way measurements are very susceptible to things like elevation changes etc skewing the results, a round trip with the same routing and consistent speeds in both direction is a better indication of the actual average.
Case in point, for some reason I can’t quite fathom we always seem to get much better mileage on our trips home from Lake Tahoe than we ever do on the way there…
Not doubting anyone but will observe that one way measurements are very susceptible to things like elevation changes etc skewing the results, a round trip with the same routing and consistent speeds in both direction is a better indication of the actual average.
Case in point, for some reason I can’t quite fathom we always seem to get much better mileage on our trips home from Lake Tahoe than we ever do on the way there…
that's very true... technically for this to be a true experiment mike would have to get a reading going the opposite direction as well
but yes i've actually observed the exact same thing, we'll often get slightly better mpgs coming back from skiing in VT than we will on the way there... long island is essentially sea level but the base of the mountain will be like 1500' up
Hypermilers are doing it for 2-3x the distance. If he has the perfect 30 mile stretch to get 55MPG good for him
If thats the case its disingenuous to say "my car gets 55MPG on the highway" instead of "I can get it to say 55MPG on that particular stretch of roadway driving a particular way". Thats why MPG is an average. You're taking the top performing numbers that go into an overall average and are presenting those as the average.
07-11-24, 12:35 PM
