The Big List of Fuel Economy

I'd be interested to see what happens to those mileage figures if they are adjusted for type of driving. You know, percentage spent in city versus highway. I can't say I'm surprised by any of them.

The Accord is surprisingly high, considering the size and heft of the redesign. Impressive, though.

The Ford GT always makes me smile, too.

The MPG's are tightly packed <20mpg, then you get to the 4-cylinder cars and the mpg's jump in increments of 3-4.

Where'd you find that picture? Where is 85 octane sold? And I hope that pump doesn't have only 1 nozzle to pump out both diesel and reg gas!

This perfectly illustrates why I don't worry too much about mileage when shopping for cars. Unless you fall into the two extremes (large truck/SUV on one side or compact hybrid/diesel on the other end of the spectrum), most of the cars are in the 17-20 mpg range. This despite wildly varying horsepower numbers and EPA estimates. Three mpg isn't going to make or break the bank for most people.

My personal experience has been the same. I've had cars varying in horsepower from 150 to 300+, and my average mpg has been between 17 and 22 mpg. And the most powerful engine isn't the one that got 17. That distinction belongs the 176 hp VR6 in my old 2002 Jetta GLX. Absolutely horrible gas mileage on that thing...

The fact that so few average above 20 mpg says more about SoCal traffic and non-owners' lead feet than the cars themselves. Moral of the story: YMMV

Interesting to see the 135 beating the WRX and Evo. None are tuned for fuel economy, but I still expected the 4-bangers to beat the twin turbo V6.

Also nice to see the V8 Pontiac tied with the V6 Caddy.

Most impressive to me is the Fit. It's fun to drive and likely whipped as hard as any of the BMW's but still had a combined over 30 mpg.

i dont think 21mpg is surprisingly high for the accord. I dont even think that meets its EPA combined number.

The Focus isnt too far behind the Fit.

The Scion's mileage is hardly impressive.

I posted this question on the X5 blog but it's more appropriate here. Are you correcting for E-90 and real gas or is it random and unaccounted for. There is a 20% difference in fuel economy with E-90 relative to pure gas and pure gas is becoming harder to find.

Also, we aren't really comparing apples to apples here. You're not going to drive the Prius the same way you drive the Evo and you're going to drive the torque monsters (135/G8/CTS) differently again.

I have a feeling when the Evo leaves the garage, that gas pedal is all on or off with little modulation in between.

"I'd be interested to see what happens to those mileage figures if they are adjusted for type of driving. You know, percentage spent in city versus highway."

That isn't going to be practical unless Edmunds installs a data logger. What would be more interesting would be if odometer miles and/or time in service were also in there.

For example, the Flex is the most recent addition, and I'd expect mileage to go up as it breaks in.

Conversely, the GT-R took a road trip then went in the shop for an extended stay. I'd expect that to go down as time goes on.

"13.35: 2007 Chevrolet Silverado LT
15.10: 2007 Toyota Tundra SR5 Double Cab"

GM's latest commercial: The Silvy is the most fuel efficient full size pickup on the market.

Me: Uh huh...

Interesting post.

I read an article on the Silverado and it said the engine does not make full power unless the throttle is pressed wide open for more than 4 seconds. I suspect GM is playing these ECU tricks to get greater EPA mileage #'s on most of their vehicles. So while GM engines may be rated at a certain HP, they really don't achieve that tq/hp curve under normal circumstances.

STI > Evo & GT-R! w00t! j/k :o) Fuel economy shouldn't be an issue for anyone considering the purchase of any of these three vehicles.

Btw, where/when is this photo from? 85 octane?!

yeah, sorry about the photo. I grabbed it from our photo archive. I have no idea where it's from.

ahightower

Interesting to see the 135 beating the WRX and Evo. None are tuned for fuel economy, but I still expected the 4-bangers to beat the twin turbo V6.

The inline 6 twin turbo in the 135/335/535 is surprisingly fuel efficient. Unlike the WRX/STi or Evo, it doesn't have to work hard to achieve 300 horsepower. I just wish mine didn't have The Lag.

This is a really cool comparison chart. Do you think it would be possible to also see a list of Edmunds.com LT vehicles that have left the fleet in the past year, such as Altima, RAV, etc...?

Still relevant since these are current generation vehicles, yes?

@ Bryn

I think you should fax these results over to GM and tell them to cut the BS about the Silverado,where is the Silverado? in the shop again maybe?

No worries, Bryn. :o) It was quite a surprise to see the 85 oct!

shaddai, I don't think it's that interesting to see the 135i getting better fuel economy than the WRX STI and Evo. One should remember that the Bimmer's engine is only powering the car's rear wheels whereas the STI and Evo have full-time all-wheel drive powertrains. It should also be noted that the N54 motor has direct injection which also helps its fuel economy. The STI's EJ25 motor and Evo's 4B11T don't have DI.

You find 85 octane at higher elevations. It's the standard regular unleaded in Colorado and the like. I've seen an 86 out in Amarillo.

subytrojan, it helps that the x35's have lots of torque available from low RPM (most of them) so you don't have to wring out the engine for max power.

Mine (a 335i) has a bad software version that has introduced turbo lag, much to my disarray. So I have to wind it out a bit more or wait a second. There's a huge thread over at e90post about it...

I'd buy a Pontiac G8 if they offered the engine from my 07 Impala SS, lifetime average has been 22.3 mpg and that is with a lot of lead foot driving. A friend with a new Accord has been complaining about her gas mileage being so lousy.

The Tundra vs Silverado numbers are interesting. Which V8 does the Silverado have the 5.3L V8? If so the Toyota has returned better milage with a larger much more powerful V8.

" dont think 21mpg is surprisingly high for the accord. I dont even think that meets its EPA combined number."

I believe the Accord V6/5ATs EPA combined rating is 22. Its not far off but I still hate that damn VCM garbage.

"I read an article on the Silverado and it said the engine does not make full power unless the throttle is pressed wide open for more than 4 seconds."

That is correct. That's why people raved about the power of the 5.3 up until this version. If you drive with a light foot, it really can get great mileage but you find youself driving with your foot down to get past the ECU programming.

I hear you can get it rechipped for "off road use only".

The list shows why cars like the TDI and Prius are so important. They really do use half the gas of the average car and give up little or nothing in terms of practicality.

The TDI is even fun to drive.

What a large list below 20 mpg...

I think they ordered the Silverado with the 6.0, right? The 5.3 with DOD ought to do significantly better.

Displacement and cylinder numbers do not determine an engine's (let alone a car's) efficiency. Looking at the 135 vs the STI or Evo, the BMW engine runs at a 10.2 compression ratio vs 8.2 for the Subaru and 8.8 for the Evo. The higher the compression ratio, the higher the efficiency of the engine. This should also remind you that nothing is free-getting tons of power out of a little engine requires putting tons of fuel through it. The heat rates (fuel used divided by power produced) of engines depend more on direct injection and compression ratios than turbos, engine sizes and cylinder numbers.

New fuel economy tip:
buy the car with the highest HP ratings in it's class and fuel mileage will be almost same

The Edge is a disaster. The CX-9 and Flex are larger and do better. What did they do wrong with the Flex?

How on earth have you managed to buy 30 vehicles that are supposed to be a cross section of what your readers purchase or drive, but you don't have a 4cylinder family sedan. That's an amazing oversight.

bepperb

They're all car nuts. They'll ask for the biggest engine in the most expensive trim every single time.

Never bought a Toyota Camry I4. Never bought a Nissan Altima I4. Never bought a Honda Accord I4. Never bought a Honda Civic I4. Never bought a Toyota Corolla I4. Never bought a Chevy Cobalt I4.....

Hmmmm........

"Never bought a Toyota Camry I4. Never bought a Nissan Altima I4. Never bought a Honda Accord I4. Never bought a Honda Civic I4. Never bought a Toyota Corolla I4. Never bought a Chevy Cobalt I4.....

Hmmmm........"

I can't figure out for the life of me what this means. My point, if 80% of all family sedans are sold with 4cyl engines, and three of the top five best selling vehicles are family sedans, than the Edmunds LT fleet should have one, even if only for comparison purposes.

And seriously, for the repair bill for the M3, you could get a base Malibu no problem.

Fuel economy is irrelevant.

We've completely run out of gas in the Southeast. That makes this entire issue purely academic.

^^
That's either a really funny comment or a really ignorant one.

The former. It really doesn't make much difference how cheap gas is either, when nobody has any available at the pump..

I may have misread but nobody mentioned driving habits here. I can almost double my wife's mpg in her Murano just because she drives, steers and yes sometimes brakes with the tall pedal.
Coefficients, compression ratios, all that gobbely gook don't mean a thing if you leave a dent in the carpet under the go-pedal every time you drive. Just a 2 cent comment because I know I put a lot of stock in what's on these pages both from the editors and all you car junkies.

When 25 (or so) people drive a car for a year, you do get a mix of driving styles. But all of these cars are subjected to the same 25 drivers with their 25 commutes. It's random, but after 20,000+ miles it pretty much evens out.

And I know for a fact that two of the folks with the longest commutes, myself and Josh, couldn't regularly put a dent in the carpet if we wanted to. Day-to-day traffic conditions rarely allow one to be a leadfoot--that only can happen on weekends or in formal settings. Believe it or not, not every editor has a heavy right foot after hours--or during hours, in some cases.

I'd say these numbers are a lot more real world than you think. Of course, that's real-world in Los Angeles, Orange County or any other population center, not real-world in Wyoming or anyplace where you don't have much traffic and can drive as fast as your conscience allows.

Makes sense. Those numbers would resonate here in Atlanta I would think.
I do like the fact that the edmunds crew does the real world affair just like the rest of us.

I've always wondered about the fuel economy figures here. They always seem a little low. When they had the 1999 New Beetle TDI in their long term fleet, they only managed to get in the high 30's. In my 2001 Golf TDI, it isn't possible to get below 40. I can flog the crap out of that thing and still get 42. If I'm driving strictly highway, I'll get 47-48.

I can't believe the list goes from 23 directly to 27 mpg.

I can think of quite a few 4cyl cars that would fill that gap.

Time to get with it edmunds.

nf

Is Montana the last stronghold of 85 octane gas? I know a lot of places 88 is the lowest, but here you have your choice of 85, 88 and 91 I think? I haven't bought anything but 85 since I got rid of my GTI, so I don't really pay attention to the others.

I am disappointed to see so few cars above 30 mpg the last 3 cars I have owned all averaged at least 30 mpg.

-85 Toyota MR2 32+ (still own)
-00 Honda Accord 2.3 VTEC 31+ (still own)
-02 VW GTI 1.8Turbo 30+ (48 month lease)

I don't have to drive in traffic much, so I think that makes a big difference. Of course maybe I just drive like a Grandpa too...

sm

I'm averaging 29.2mpg in my '08 xB with 5 speed manual tranny in my normal driving, about 60-40 city-highway driving. On the highway only driving it goes up to 33. I now have 19,000 miles after 13 months.

That's the same millage I got with my old '83 VW Quantum with the 64 hp turbo diesel that could do 0 to 60 in 22 seconds.

is the car being driven anymore? What happened to it after 4 years? What is the shape of the batteries? Or the fuel efficiency.

My '04 M3 appears to trump your car's mpg easily. Typical daily drive is 25-30miles roundtrip in rush hr traffic in Louisville, KY. I also often drive the car hard afterwards and on weekends to relieve myself from stressful rush hour. I average right around 20mpg. Y'all must really be getting on the car to be getting lower mpg than me (I don't baby my M)!

My '04 M3 appears to trump your car's mpg easily. Typical daily drive is 25-30miles roundtrip in rush hr traffic in Louisville, KY. I also often drive the car hard afterwards and on weekends to relieve myself from stressful rush hour. I average right around 20mpg. Y'all must really be getting on the car to be getting lower mpg than me (I don't baby my M)!