Fuel conception in new RX350
07-21-06, 07:52 PM
#16
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those EPA figures are a joke. Even the gov't knows that. They are changing the test next year I think, to reflect real world mileage. You can take 2-5 mpg off any advertised mpg. I get around 16-17 in city driving and 22-24 highway. Combined my 350 is about 18.5 to 19. I've never averaged over 20 on either my 04 330 or the 05. Check Consumer Reports or some other places for real world mpg. Even the Prius only gets 42 mpg according to Consumer Reports.
07-22-06, 06:49 AM
#18
Moderator
It's possible to get EPA numbers in your own driving, but it's rare.
The EPA tests all cars with the same test, so although they probably will not reflect the mileage you will get, their real value has always been as a relative number rather than as an absolute. Use them only to compare cars to each other, but don't expect those numbers in your actual driving.
The EPA tests all cars with the same test, so although they probably will not reflect the mileage you will get, their real value has always been as a relative number rather than as an absolute. Use them only to compare cars to each other, but don't expect those numbers in your actual driving.
07-22-06, 06:56 AM
#19
Originally Posted by bextreme1
Those EPA figures are a joke. Even the gov't knows that. They are changing the test next year I think, to reflect real world mileage. You can take 2-5 mpg off any advertised mpg. I get around 16-17 in city driving and 22-24 highway. Combined my 350 is about 18.5 to 19. I've never averaged over 20 on either my 04 330 or the 05. Check Consumer Reports or some other places for real world mpg. Even the Prius only gets 42 mpg according to Consumer Reports.
We bought the RX as a smaller, more fuel efficient SUV (we studied the 400H and it would have given us very little extra with our type of driving). If we don't get close to the 19/24 on its trip computer, I will be disappointed! So far the trip computer is saying around 14, but we are still on the first tank of gas with 100+ miles so I will reserve judgement for a few tanks.
07-23-06, 05:50 AM
#20
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Georgia
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silverlady, I disagree with your conclusion that for your type of driving that the hybrid wouldn't make much of a difference. The hybrid makes the most difference in bumper to bumper city driving like you concluded, but also makes quite a difference when you have to deal with lots of traffic lights. Fuel consumption goes to zero at a traffic light in a hybrid if you aren't running the air conditioner. Regenerative brakes and coasting helps charge the battery and helps the car get back up to speed from a stop. I bet the hybrid also has lower rolling resistance tires. Little things add up.
Switch your dashboard computer to instantaneous mpg mode (thats the one that reads 0 mpg when you are stopped) and you will be blown away by how much gas you burn to get your vehicle up to speed (we are talking in the 3 to 6 mpg range on acceleration). This may help you ease up on the throttle and improve your mpg figures. Also agree that a new engine is less fuel efficient than a well broken in engine; but do you really want to wait to see better fuel efficiency?
Your profile says that you are in NJ. You are getting ethanol blended in your fuel. Have you checked your GX's fuel consumption figures recently? Most people report worse fuel economy when ethanol is blended in the fuel.
I think you will enjoy your car. It would be nice if we all slowed down on the highway, eased up on the throttle, and coasted more in city driving though.
Switch your dashboard computer to instantaneous mpg mode (thats the one that reads 0 mpg when you are stopped) and you will be blown away by how much gas you burn to get your vehicle up to speed (we are talking in the 3 to 6 mpg range on acceleration). This may help you ease up on the throttle and improve your mpg figures. Also agree that a new engine is less fuel efficient than a well broken in engine; but do you really want to wait to see better fuel efficiency?
Your profile says that you are in NJ. You are getting ethanol blended in your fuel. Have you checked your GX's fuel consumption figures recently? Most people report worse fuel economy when ethanol is blended in the fuel.
I think you will enjoy your car. It would be nice if we all slowed down on the highway, eased up on the throttle, and coasted more in city driving though.
Last edited by X72; 07-23-06 at 05:54 AM.
07-23-06, 07:19 AM
#21
X72-
We test drove the RX400H a couple of times. We looked at the instantaneous fuel consumption for most of the driving and it wasn't good.
The test drive area consists of the type of driving that I normally do, as described above. The car had a number of miles on it, and the overall mpg in its computer was poor. When we questioned the "dealer expert", we were told that the driving was not considered "city driving", and we would not see the higher milage figures we expected.
The other main area we hoped to save was for the very short trips in the winter, when my GX really sucks gas to warm up. I hoped the RX400h would excel here and run on electricity. I asked around, and was told no - it uses the gasoline engine to warm up.
So, I really tried all the angles to like it, and would have happily paid the extra money, taken the hit to AWD capability and waited for the 07 400H with gen 5 nav. But after I read complaint after complaint from owners on various internet sites about low mpg, that finally killed that idea.
BTW, I have only had the GX since January and have checked the gas mileage several times since getting it.
If we all drove at optimal speeds, slowed down for stops, avoided fast starts, etc. we could probably all improve our gas milage in any vehicle.
We test drove the RX400H a couple of times. We looked at the instantaneous fuel consumption for most of the driving and it wasn't good.
The test drive area consists of the type of driving that I normally do, as described above. The car had a number of miles on it, and the overall mpg in its computer was poor. When we questioned the "dealer expert", we were told that the driving was not considered "city driving", and we would not see the higher milage figures we expected.
The other main area we hoped to save was for the very short trips in the winter, when my GX really sucks gas to warm up. I hoped the RX400h would excel here and run on electricity. I asked around, and was told no - it uses the gasoline engine to warm up.
So, I really tried all the angles to like it, and would have happily paid the extra money, taken the hit to AWD capability and waited for the 07 400H with gen 5 nav. But after I read complaint after complaint from owners on various internet sites about low mpg, that finally killed that idea.
BTW, I have only had the GX since January and have checked the gas mileage several times since getting it.
If we all drove at optimal speeds, slowed down for stops, avoided fast starts, etc. we could probably all improve our gas milage in any vehicle.
07-28-06, 07:52 AM
#22
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Georgia
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You make excellent points Silverlady. The RX hybrid, like the Accord hybrid, are biased towards driving performance, not maximal fuel economy.
The only other thing I can think of in helping you make a more fair comparision between your two vehicle's fuel consumption is to not rely on the trip computer, since the GX's figures may be too optimistic, the RX's figures may be too pessimistic, or some combination.
If you haven't checked mileage this way or for anyone else reading, this means fill the gasoline tank and reset the trip odometer to zero; drive normally; note gallons needed to refill tank and miles driven on trip computer and calculate mileage by dividing miles driven by gallons pumped to refill tank in order to see how accurate the trip computer's avg mpg figures are.
This way, you find if your trip computer calculation is accurate or not. You may have already done this.
By the way, my understanding is that the RX hybrid is all wheel drive, using the electric motor to power the rear wheels. That means that a fair comparision would be the hybrid with the all wheel drive ( with only gas engine) version of the RX, not the hybrid with front wheel drive version of the RX.
The only other thing I can think of in helping you make a more fair comparision between your two vehicle's fuel consumption is to not rely on the trip computer, since the GX's figures may be too optimistic, the RX's figures may be too pessimistic, or some combination.
If you haven't checked mileage this way or for anyone else reading, this means fill the gasoline tank and reset the trip odometer to zero; drive normally; note gallons needed to refill tank and miles driven on trip computer and calculate mileage by dividing miles driven by gallons pumped to refill tank in order to see how accurate the trip computer's avg mpg figures are.
This way, you find if your trip computer calculation is accurate or not. You may have already done this.
By the way, my understanding is that the RX hybrid is all wheel drive, using the electric motor to power the rear wheels. That means that a fair comparision would be the hybrid with the all wheel drive ( with only gas engine) version of the RX, not the hybrid with front wheel drive version of the RX.
Last edited by X72; 07-28-06 at 08:08 AM.
07-28-06, 05:31 PM
#23
Originally Posted by X72
You make excellent points Silverlady. The RX hybrid, like the Accord hybrid, are biased towards driving performance, not maximal fuel economy.
The only other thing I can think of in helping you make a more fair comparision between your two vehicle's fuel consumption is to not rely on the trip computer, since the GX's figures may be too optimistic, the RX's figures may be too pessimistic, or some combination.
If you haven't checked mileage this way or for anyone else reading, this means fill the gasoline tank and reset the trip odometer to zero; drive normally; note gallons needed to refill tank and miles driven on trip computer and calculate mileage by dividing miles driven by gallons pumped to refill tank in order to see how accurate the trip computer's avg mpg figures are.
This way, you find if your trip computer calculation is accurate or not. You may have already done this.
By the way, my understanding is that the RX hybrid is all wheel drive, using the electric motor to power the rear wheels. That means that a fair comparision would be the hybrid with the all wheel drive ( with only gas engine) version of the RX, not the hybrid with front wheel drive version of the RX.
The only other thing I can think of in helping you make a more fair comparision between your two vehicle's fuel consumption is to not rely on the trip computer, since the GX's figures may be too optimistic, the RX's figures may be too pessimistic, or some combination.
If you haven't checked mileage this way or for anyone else reading, this means fill the gasoline tank and reset the trip odometer to zero; drive normally; note gallons needed to refill tank and miles driven on trip computer and calculate mileage by dividing miles driven by gallons pumped to refill tank in order to see how accurate the trip computer's avg mpg figures are.
This way, you find if your trip computer calculation is accurate or not. You may have already done this.
By the way, my understanding is that the RX hybrid is all wheel drive, using the electric motor to power the rear wheels. That means that a fair comparision would be the hybrid with the all wheel drive ( with only gas engine) version of the RX, not the hybrid with front wheel drive version of the RX.
If you notice I am from NJ, and will always get the AWD if there is a choice - in fact, it is almost impossible to get the FWD around here. For the 400H, I checked the online video schematics that showed the system - the rear wheels in the AWD system only get their power from the electricity which has nowhere near the available torque. The 350 uses the engine for both front and rear, and I believe even has limited slip differential which I much prefer. These are things you probably care nothing about in FL, but are important to me. The 400H also has CVT (continuously variable transmission), so no switching into lower gears manually and no "snow" switch.
I just put in the second tank of gas, and so far the RX is telling me it is averaging 16mpg - still very dissappointing, but I will give it more time.
07-28-06, 07:44 PM
#24
Moderator
I certainly don't bother to check actual mpg all the time either, especially as both my cars now have "computers" for that, but I do check it for a few tanks to get some idea of whether the car's computer is reading high, low or just about right. For my purposes, the mpg on the cars' computers is very close.
The "driving range" (miles until empty) is always way off on the conservative side, but the gas gague is accurate enough for that, if you consider "E" equals 2 gallons left accurate enough.
The "driving range" (miles until empty) is always way off on the conservative side, but the gas gague is accurate enough for that, if you consider "E" equals 2 gallons left accurate enough.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
satz
RX - 2nd Gen (2004-2009)
3
12-05-13 04:45 PM
