Ratman009

All figures are in Imperial (miles per gallon)

IS250 AWD - 27 city/37 highway
IS250 RWD (auto) - 29 city/42 highway
IS250 RWD (manual) - 24 city/37 highway
IS350 RWD (auto) - 26 city/37 highway

Okay, Lexus of Canada also rates the current IS300 at 22/32, and we all know that the US ratings were more like 18/25 on the car.

so by my rough calculations, we are looking at:

IS250 AWD (auto) - 23/30
IS250 RWD (auto) - 25/35
IS250 RWD (manual) - 20/30
IS350 RWD (auto) - 22/30

Still not too damn shabby.

How the heck does Canada calculate these things? Do they put the car on a lift with the tires in the air or something to get ratings this high?

CDN_Lexus

Imperial gallon is approximately 25% larger than U.S. gallon.

Maximus91

wow, how does the manual get less mpg then the auto AWD, that's just not right, manuals always have 1-2 mpg more than an auto.

TimboIS

Actually it's closer to 20% (1.2009499x to be exact).

LEXUS FAN!

on the scion xB the manual has one less MPG...

anyways...

those figures are awesome... i can't believe they are so high

Ratman009

I actually wrote "imperial" gallon and didn't even think to perform the conversion properly. My estimates for the actual US MPG figures are accurate within a half MPG or so. If anyone feels like doing the proper math feel free.

XeroK00L

Good find, Ratman009!

With proper unit conversion, the precise numbers in miles per U.S gallons are (assuming combined mileage = 55% x city + 45% x highway):
IS250 AWD (auto) - 22.49 city/30.82 highway => 26.24 combined (25.41 per lexus.jp)
IS250 RWD (auto) - 24.15 city/34.98 highway => 29.02 combined (27.76 per lexus.jp)
IS250 RWD (manual) - 19.99 city/30.82 highway => 24.86 combined (N/A for JDM)
IS350 RWD (auto) - 21.65 city/30.82 highway => 25.78 combined (23.53 per lexus.jp)

I guess the JDM figures are lower because they do a lot more city driving than we do.

It is indeed unusual that the manual 250 gets the worst mileage of all (even worse than the IS350), but not impossible. My guess is that the high gear ratios (for a faster acceleration) exclusively for the manual gearbox has to do with it.

LexusLuver

[QUOTE=Ratman009]All figures are in Imperial (miles per gallon)
IS350 RWD (auto) - 26 city/37 highway
[QUOTE]
Avalon rated at
26//39
Avalon's EPA rating of 22/31

XeroK00L

Again, 26/39 is in miles per Imperial gallons, not U.S gallons.

However, Crester @ my.is did make a good point about the lamer test procedure that the Canadian goverment uses compared to the EPA's procedure that is lame already.

With a unit conversion, Avalon's 26/39 figure should've resulted in 21.65/32.48 =~ 22/32 instead of EPA's 22/31. So it is quite possible that we'll see slightly lower numbers when the official EPA mileage ratings for the new IS are out.

biker

There must be something fishy about those MT numbers - there's no other car that has such a large disparity in EPA figures - especially since MTs usually get better milage than an equivalent AT. Yes, the gearing is a bit more aggressive, but 5MPG is a big diff out of essentially the same car/drivetrain. I call BS on the MT numbers relative to the AT numbers.

XeroK00L

The gearing isn't just "a bit" more aggressive, it's overall 15% more aggressive. That's quite a bit. The resulting MPG of the 250 MT is about 14.3% worse than the 250 AT. Sounds consistent enough to me.

flipside909

When did EPA ratings matter in Switzerland anyway? It's just a tested figure or a rough estimate of what to expect. Your own fuel economy will vary from what the EPA or whatever government agency puts out.

I love how so many people are already calling BS or talking down the New IS that's not even for sale yet. Just wait and see what people's real-world posted experiences are...like on here, my.IS or even Edmunds Town Hall. On that note, thanks for posting up my picture links in edmunds of the New IS stats w/o crediting it.

spwolf

actually, Toyota's new auto's are pretty sweet, lighter than Manual transmission and get better mpg too.

I think the most important thing here is comparison with old IS - new IS350 should get significantly better mpg, with that 100 hp increase :-)

TheRupp

Gas mileage is actually the only reason I went with an ES instead of an IS...

Great find though... sign me up