Fuel Capacity and Range and MPG readings

[1953dad]

Thanks Jetracers1. Thats helpful knowing my experience is similar. I was expecting better but it is what it is.

[dtech]

Originally Posted by Cheers

My Santa Fe is a 2.0T FWD...Purchased 10/21/12..

The last fill-up was 1/15/13, and the readings were:
23.06 MPG manual....24.2 computer...avg. speed 30 MPH
The miles driven consisted of (approximately):
15% HWY...(speeds 65 to 80+ MPH)
60% Urban...(lights or stop signs every 1/4 to 1 mile or so)
25% City...(lights every block or two)
I would guess that I shifted manually on at least 50% of those miles.

I have had 8 fill-ups and the MPG has ranged from a low of 21.7 MPG to a high of 25.8 MPG, all figured manually.

I try to use the same service station, and same pump for fill-ups, always stopping after one extra click when it hits full, just to be consistant.

I`m not unhappy, as this is with 'winter gas'...cold temps, and a new engine.

I have a different perspective on the whole mpg scenario as the pre revised EPA mpgs ratings did have a significant influence on my decision , possibly could have bought another brand but a lot of other factors were involved as well. The whole thing still doesn't quite smell right to me, and it's definately not a matter of extra gas cost but from where I sit behind the wheel of the 2.0T with AWD, formerly rated at 27 highway mpgs :

- I've not seen anyone on here report those mpgs doing highway driving using actual gas measurements - so what method did Hyundai really use to test mpgs ?
- Maybe Hyundai's test used the on board computer calculation - that may have reported 27 mpg but we all know for some reason it calculates on the high side.
- In the several decades the EPA has required tests for US vehicles only 2 models had to be revised, yes 2 models, not multiple models across two different brands - Kia and Hyundai which are arguably separate makes.
- Posts have given kudos for Hyundai about their careful attention to design and features and I agree - so when it comes to adhering and executing on what most consider an important test - EPA mpgs they totally "forget" to follow procedures. And apparently were stonewalling customer's inquiries until enough complaints were lodged with the EPA to launch an investigation
- Hyundai really touted their redisgn of the Sante Fe - less weight so more responsive, better handling, more efficient. Well as they say 2 of 3 ain't bad ?
- the 2.0T is a fine engine, but with respect to fuel economy with the 2.0T the've not really pushed the envelope or the mpgs.
- Last I heard the EPA or the Justice Dept is still investigating and I've heard class action law suits have been filed. For me I am having a difficult time accepting that it was all a simple mistake.
My .03

[Cheers]

Originally Posted by dtech

- I've not seen anyone on here report those mpgs doing highway driving using actual gas measurements - so what method did Hyundai really use to test mpg

In as much as one would have to drive a ways to reach a high speed highway, then drive at 55mph to get a 'reading', then drive back to find a gas station to refill, it wouldn`t be a true 'highway' MPG reading....

(For us owners), probably the only way to get a fairly accurate 'highway' MPG reading would be to:

Drive to a high speed highway, bring the speed up to 55 MPH...set the cruise....'clear' the MPG reading on the computer....drive for a number of miles to get a highway reading....Then subtract the infamous 2MPG error factor to reach a 'relatively' accurate highway MPG number...

[BradFe]

Just adding a few cents more...We are experiencing a -1.6 MPG actual gas measurement when compared to the on-board computer MPG. The service tech said we had to wait until 5,000 miles were on the vehicle for it to be accurate. HMMMMMMMMM

[dtech]

Originally Posted by Cheers

In as much as one would have to drive a ways to reach a high speed highway, then drive at 55mph to get a 'reading', then drive back to find a gas station to refill, it wouldn`t be a true 'highway' MPG reading....

(For us owners), probably the only way to get a fairly accurate 'highway' MPG reading would be to:

Drive to a high speed highway, bring the speed up to 55 MPH...set the cruise....'clear' the MPG reading on the computer....drive for a number of miles to get a highway reading....Then subtract the infamous 2MPG error factor to reach a 'relatively' accurate highway MPG number...

Just beating a dead horse some more - but with my AWD 2.0T I suspect I don't quite hit 27 mpg (pre revised EPA rating) going 55 mph over a relatively flat drive. The dash readout will tell me it's about 28 mpg . So what did these guys at Hyundai do in the original mpg test - take it out on the track for a few laps and look at the dash reading and lo and behold it says 27 mpg ?
I know no one but Hyundai knows for sure , they only say it was all owing to not understanding/executing the proper PA test procedures......

[HoseHead]

We must also keep in mind that EPA MPG tests are done in laboratories under ideal conditions. I believe their even done on a dyno and not an actual road! So there is no wind, no winter gas, no weight in the vehicle, no winter tires, and no accounting for aggressive acceleration.

My 2.0T AWD is getting pretty good fuel economy given the fact that it only has 1750KMs on it, using winter gas, been averaging -10˚c since we got it, using winter tires, 2 people in the car 50-60% of the time, and about 70% highway (at 120km/hr or 70-75mph) and 30% city.

My average fuel economy after 3 fill-ups is 12.7 L/100km (18.5 USMPG). Not as good as I had hoped but WAY batter than my 2004 Pathfinder (Pumpfinder we called her), and the Santa Fe has more HP and Torque! I'm hoping things will improve once the engine has a bit more on her and the warmer weather and better tires come along.

[dtech]

Originally Posted by HoseHead

We must also keep in mind that EPA MPG tests are done in laboratories under ideal conditions. I believe their even done on a dyno and not an actual road! So there is no wind, no winter gas, no weight in the vehicle, no winter tires, and no accounting for aggressive acceleration.

My 2.0T AWD is getting pretty good fuel economy given the fact that it only has 1750KMs on it, using winter gas, been averaging -10˚c since we got it, using winter tires, 2 people in the car 50-60% of the time, and about 70% highway (at 120km/hr or 70-75mph) and 30% city.

My average fuel economy after 3 fill-ups is 12.7 L/100km (18.5 USMPG). Not as good as I had hoped but WAY batter than my 2004 Pathfinder (Pumpfinder we called her), and the Santa Fe has more HP and Torque! I'm hoping things will improve once the engine has a bit more on her and the warmer weather and and better tires come along.

here in Denver CO one Nissan dealer has for months been advertising 2012 Pathfinders and Xterras - he had hundreds a few months back and given the large (up to $10 discounts on some models) that aren't flying off the lots. I was tempted to look at a 2012 Pathfinder as I do go off road 10 times or so a year.
My wife uses the SFS as her daily driver - city commute and the gas consumption is not unreasonable or overly excessive.

[anthonybsd]

On my second tank of my new Sport with 2.4L. My average is 14 MPG with 99% city driving. Not sure how much of this is engine breaking in and what not, but somehow I'm doubtful I'll get anywhere near the advertised MPG.

[Cheers]

Originally Posted by anthonybsd

On my second tank of my new Sport with 2.4L. My average is 14 MPG with 99% city driving. Not sure how much of this is engine breaking in and what not, but somehow I'm doubtful I'll get anywhere near the advertised MPG.

Hmmmm..I`ve driven in Manhattan a few times...big difference between there and just about any other city.

I wonder what the EPA`s definition of "city and 'highway' is?

You are right, dtech, that horse was dead a long time ago...

[anthonybsd]

Originally Posted by Cheers

Hmmmm..I`ve driven in Manhattan a few times...big difference between there and just about any other city.

I wonder what the EPA`s definition of "city and 'highway' is?

You are right, dtech, that horse was dead a long time ago...

Well I haven't really even gotten into any serious traffic yet. Just minor, light to light.