Hyundai Forums banner

161 - 180 of 181 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
Top causes of significant MPG variance among owners:

1. Driver (primary cause)
2. Environment

Here in Phoenix, AZ. 115 degree summer? around 22-24 MPG. Any other time of year, I'm averaging around 25-27 MPG. Have I had worse MPG during my approximately 14 months of ownership? Yes. I've had as low as 18-19 MPG but it's only due to my intentional lead foot. I just get the urge at times. Those of you getting even worse than 18-19 MPG have some real issues. See primary cause above: your "light footedness" is likely not as light as you may think. I used to think I could squeeze out some good MPGs in my lifetime, but I realized that I was as heavy as everyone else once I bought my Prius. Another significant factor in averaging 60 MPG on my Prius, other than the hybrid system, is that it accelerates VERY VERY VERY slowly. I've applied this technique to my SFS and have had as good 29, near 30 in a tank doing about 60/40 highway/city driving.

In conclusion: accelerate very slowly (don't worry about your rear view mirror), go a few miles per hour slower than the speed limit, and MAINTAIN this amount of depression on the gas pedal. If you do this, your speed will vary since you're depressing the pedal at a constant rate. This is what you want, not maintain any particular speed, but to maintain constant depression rate! Slow down some, gain some speed, that's how you should be if you want the best MPG. GOOD LUCK.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
427 Posts
I'm a brand new HYUNDAI SANTE FE SPORT AWD owner - and notice POOR FUEL CONSUMPTION also - I'm Only getting 330kms per 60L tank !!?? WTF ? --- and Why is it, that the fuel gauge "reader" starts at 600km til empty - but after Only 330kms I'm on empty !??? the Advertised 21MPG is actually working out to 13MPG ( after converting from KM to G ) - What am I missing here ?!?
oh god you got ripped off return it to the dealership
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
I drive an SFS 3.3L V6 and my average consumption is 16.9mpg
worst is 15.1mpg and the best is 19.6mpg that is on the highway. Values are from fuelly:


Is this normal? I drive usually below 120kph and I don't really have a heavy foot. I use the car for work and I'm mostly alone in the car and I dont have the a/c on full blast.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
870 Posts
I drive an SFS 3.3L V6 and my average consumption is 16.9mpg
worst is 15.1mpg and the best is 19.6mpg that is on the highway. Values are from fuelly.
Is this normal? I drive usually below 120kph and I don't really have a heavy foot. I use the car for work and I'm mostly alone in the car and I dont have the a/c on full blast.
Probably best to ask at the LWB SF because in the US/CA we don't have the V6 in the SFS. I wish we did because your fuel usage is similar to mine and I have the 2.0T
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
After 4 months of tallying my Mileage & Gas Consumption (from 2600km to 8800km) my averages are:
  • 345km (214miles) per full tank
  • 93aed (25usd) per full tank
  • 6.41km (4miles) per Liter
  • 15.59L per 100km! -not far from what is indicated by the computer.
Either Eco On/Off it's almost the same; mostly city driving on say 80km/h (50mph); my SFDM engine is 3.3L-V6.
ok so I'm not alone with this very low economy. I have the same thing in Qatar, although I average around 14.4L/100Km as per the last time I checked.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
I totally agree with "sccracing" (post #161). He has a similar setup as me (SFS 2.0T FWD). I also have the 200+ lb. SR and 19" wheels, added weight that doesn't help mpgs. Fuel mileage IS highly related to driver inputs and environment (and options on the car that add weight).


Regarding driver input, both my wife and myself share driving our cars. I am a more conscientious driver regarding using efficient driving techniques. My wife, on the other hand, just drives - not necessarily with a predominant heavy foot, but just doesn't use efficient mpg driving techniques (coasting, maintaining gap distances and speed, timing stop lights, etc.). Together, after four fill-ups since purchase, we average 23.8 mpgs (50/50 city/hwy - calculated). We average higher mpgs when I'm the predominant driver, not just in the SFS, but other cars we own or have owned. Don't get me wrong - I like to drive - and not like a grandpa. But I drive to enjoy both the performance and efficiency capabilities of the cars I own. I see so many people here in Florida race from stoplight to stoplight. It's no wonder people complain about mpgs.


Environment, in my mind, includes not only location and time of year one measures mpgs, but the car's maintained condition. Included in maintenance is tire air pressure being maintained at the proper psi, along with a host of other things. I try to keep our tire psi 1-2 lbs over the recommended amount. I've been driving in Florida since purchase, using the air conditioner 70% of the time. I believe our mpgs will increase slightly when we return to Ohio in a couple weeks - we'll probably use the air conditioner less frequently, at least for the next couple of months. I am anxious to see what the mpgs will be on the trip (over 1200 miles - hwy) back to Ohio.


I do not agree that the SFS has horrible fuel consumption. I am pleased with the mpgs we've acheived thus far. We are acheiving the mid-point of the EPA mpg estimates, driving 50/50 city/hwy, and that's about all one can expect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,397 Posts
From Edmunds summary review of the 2014 SFS

Cons
Lower fuel economy than that of rivals; poor rearward visibility.


So the above statement is less subjective than simply saying "horibble fuel consumption", it's based upon where the SFS ranks with EPA mpg tests compared to CUVs in it's class.

As fuel efficiency is ranked no 1 in most consumer polls for buying criteria - have to believe those visiting Edmunds looking for CUVs and concerned about mpg numbers would be negatively impacted.

This is quite the turn around from car mag reviews prior to the epa numbers being adjusted downwards - many cited good fuel efficiency. Of course that was back in 2012 and competitors have either released new models or improved existing models to surpass the fuel efficiency of the SFS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
I don't have the car yet ( planning in the next few months )

But here we have the Santa Fe Sport ( It's called just Santa Fe ) with options for the 2.4L & 3.3L engines... while the LWB ( It's called Grand Santa Fe ) only comes with 3.3L engine..

How the 2.4L compares to the 3.3L in fuel economy ? I heard that the 2.4L will make it slow as the car is heavy.. note that it's not turbo charged, its 190HP ( nearly I don't remember the exact number )



both have 3 rows of seats ( even the SWB ), I wonder If we can remove it later to save weight ( and get better Fuel economy ) and install the storage instead of it, I feel it will be better option for me.. but I don't know if the third row seat is removable or not...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
427 Posts
well, you have a suv....It's going to drink like a 265 hp suv.
Might want to look into a honda civic maybe?

And it depends greatly.

During the summer, on a straight road, my maxima can do 8l/100km. at 90kmh.
Winter, remote starter, 20L/100km.
montreal traffic, 30L/100km

Drive it hard summer? 13L/100km average.

It really depends on you, and the weather, and remote start, and how much weight you carry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,397 Posts
well, you have a suv....It's going to drink like a 265 hp suv.
Might want to look into a honda civic maybe?

or a CR-V if better fuel efficiency is a priority, US EPA rates it as one of the more fuel efficient SUVs - 26 combined 23/31 city highway.

AWD version only loses 1 mpg in each category - unlike the SFS .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
well, you have a suv....It's going to drink like a 265 hp suv.
Might want to look into a honda civic maybe?

or a CR-V if better fuel efficiency is a priority, US EPA rates it as one of the more fuel efficient SUVs - 26 combined 23/31 city highway.

AWD version only loses 1 mpg in each category - unlike the SFS .
Or a Mazda CX-5, if better fuel efficiency is a priority. EPA is as high as 26 city, 35 hwy. Consider though that the CX-5 or the Honda CR-V are considerably smaller that the SFS.

Personally, I'd prefer a higher mpg SUV than the SFS, but not at the expense of the U (utility) in an SUV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
I've tested out many variables when it comes to gas mileage of my 2013 2.0T AWD. What I've realized is that I think the recommended 33 PSI seems low. When I put it up to 38 PSI, my car handles noticeably better and the gas mileage is definitely much better. I figure that since my Continental tires are rated up to a max of 51 PSI, 38-40 PSI should be totally fine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
With recent fill-ups I'm getting between 22 to 24mpg with 80% city driving, I'm in Canada and the gauge would normally show about 10.5L/100kms, but in reality it should be close to 12-13L/100kms

This is 2014 Santa Fe Limited with AWD, on the road since Oct 2014.
 

·
Registered
‘19 Santa Fe Ultimate 2.0T FWD (Machine Gray/Espresso Gray)
Joined
·
1,495 Posts
I've tested out many variables when it comes to gas mileage of my 2013 2.0T AWD. What I've realized is that I think the recommended 33 PSI seems low. When I put it up to 38 PSI, my car handles noticeably better and the gas mileage is definitely much better. I figure that since my Continental tires are rated up to a max of 51 PSI, 38-40 PSI should be totally fine.
However, your stopping distance increases and your tires wear unevenly when overinflated. Tires will not grip as well in wet conditions. Also, your ride comfort is diminished by the harder ride of overinflated tires.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
If the sidewall of the tire says max pressure of 51psi, then the tires won't be overinflated at 38 psi. Thus, they shouldn't wear any different. However, you should keep them at the pressure that is listed on the door...as this is the recommended pressure and is the pressure that the car was tested under. You might get a little better mpg, but you will get a different overall feel for the car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
If the sidewall of the tire says max pressure of 51psi, then the tires won't be overinflated at 38 psi. Thus, they shouldn't wear any different. However, you should keep them at the pressure that is listed on the door...as this is the recommended pressure and is the pressure that the car was tested under. You might get a little better mpg, but you will get a different overall feel for the car.
Tires are over-inflated, not based on max pressure of tire, but the contact patch on the road. The absolute best mpg would be running at max pressure because you would have the least amount of rolling resistance, but sacrifice many other things.

The inflation pressure for the Santa Fe is based on the below diagram. However, it can vary from tire to tire based on tread design, sidewall strength, etc.

I would suggest if you are playing with higher pressure, to measure your tread depth across the tires are regular intervals to ensure even wear.

 

·
Registered
‘19 Santa Fe Ultimate 2.0T FWD (Machine Gray/Espresso Gray)
Joined
·
1,495 Posts
If the sidewall of the tire says max pressure of 51psi, then the tires won't be overinflated at 38 psi. Thus, they shouldn't wear any different. However, you should keep them at the pressure that is listed on the door...as this is the recommended pressure and is the pressure that the car was tested under. You might get a little better mpg, but you will get a different overall feel for the car.
Are you really saying that tires will not wear differently based on their inflation level? I think you have a lot to learn about the subject.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
No, that is not what I am saying. I said that the tires are not over inflated at 38psi when Hyundai recommends 34 (at least for mine with Kumho's) and the poster said the tire had max psi of 51. You should read my post before responding. Will increasing/decreasing the pressure affect the car's handling...absolutely.

Example: Hyundai could say the pressure of the tire should be 34psi; however, Ford could be using the exact same tire and recommend the pressure be 40psi. Why the difference? Based in handling, etc of the car.

Their is a reason that Hyundai recommends 34 psi. That is where I keep mine. Keep in mind of the tps system when playing with air pressure. The sensors will activate if the tire is under inflated or over inflated. I'm not sure what the settings are for the SFS.
 

·
Registered
‘19 Santa Fe Ultimate 2.0T FWD (Machine Gray/Espresso Gray)
Joined
·
1,495 Posts
The max allowable pressure for a tire is irrelevant. For our SFS, 38 psi is on the overinflated side of the scale, just as 30 is underinflated. The more you go either way, the more your tire wear will be impacted. I shoot for 34 every two weeks. Gets difficult in the winter weather, though.
 
161 - 180 of 181 Posts
Top