Fuel consumption

[Frank Dennis]

I have an '05 Forester with a bit over 3K miles on the clock.
I drive about 60% secondary, and 40% highway.
With 4 fillups at the same station, and pump, I average 25.6 mpg.

 

[Greg]

Sounds pretty normal. Is there a question?

 

[Nicolaas]

Wow, I'm jealous. I do about the same type of driving. I am generally very
gentle with the gas pedal. My best has been 22.8mpg. It is usually around
21.5mpg. I have 3000 miles on my 05 OBW 4 cylinder Automatic.

 

[jabario]

Try a different brand of gas. I got 23.5 mpg with my fillup today and
I have a lead foot.

 

[Guest]

Wow, I'm jealous. I do about the same type of driving. I am generally very
gentle with the gas pedal. My best has been 22.8mpg. It is usually around
21.5mpg. I have 3000 miles on my 05 OBW 4 cylinder Automatic.

I have to say I find these discussions on fuel consumption a bit
meaningless.

Fuel consumption varies so much depending on driving style, type of
terrain, speed, temperature and traffic.

I, too, have a 2005 2.5i OBW with automatic and find I get better than
EPA rating on the highways and better than EPA overall on a long mixed
trip.

But in my home town in winter, where I rarely get above third gear
since it's all up and down hills with a 40 km speed limit, I'm getting
much worse than EPA - about twice my highway consumption.

Overall, I'm impressed with the performance.

 

[Larry Weil]

(e-mail address removed) wrote in

Fuel consumption varies so much depending on driving style, type of
terrain, speed, temperature and traffic.

And also the type of fuel, if it "reformulated", has MTBE or Ethanol, and
if it's winter or summer blend.

 

[Mike]

Not to mention outside air temp because it has a direct impact on power
production (and thus gas pedal usage), as well as air conditioner which on a
small 2.0L saps a lot more than on a big V8.

 

[Tom Reingold]

I have to say I find these discussions on fuel consumption a bit
meaningless.

Fuel consumption varies so much depending on driving style, type of
terrain, speed, temperature and traffic.

I, too, have a 2005 2.5i OBW with automatic and find I get better than
EPA rating on the highways and better than EPA overall on a long mixed
trip.

But in my home town in winter, where I rarely get above third gear
since it's all up and down hills with a 40 km speed limit, I'm getting
much worse than EPA - about twice my highway consumption.

Overall, I'm impressed with the performance.

I like to hear all the various descriptions of people's driving styles
and the terrains and circumstances and restrictions they are under. I
put it all in perspective. Having heard all the testimonies here, I
realize I am getting normal efficiency from my car, and that's a bit of
a comfort, and it's also a bit annoying that I can't expect much better.
But either way, I'm glad to have the perspective.

 

[John Rethorst]

I, too, have a 2005 2.5i OBW with automatic and find I get better than
EPA rating on the highways and better than EPA overall on a long mixed
trip.

[/QUOTE]

Just my experience with my '01 OBW, 2.5l automatic.

 

[Bruce Hoult]

I like to hear all the various descriptions of people's driving styles
and the terrains and circumstances and restrictions they are under. I
put it all in perspective. Having heard all the testimonies here, I
realize I am getting normal efficiency from my car, and that's a bit of
a comfort, and it's also a bit annoying that I can't expect much better.
But either way, I'm glad to have the perspective.

I find it interesting how different engine styles or engine tuning
styles make a huge difference to the relative peformance and fuel
consumption of different cars.

If I take it reasonably easy in my 2.5l Legacy wagon (1995 250T auto)
then I use between about 8.7 and 9 l/100 km on a long trip. This is
worse than my previous 2.0l Toyota Corona liftback which used about 8
l/100 km, and I believe that is pretty typical for many 1.8 - 2.0 - 2.5
cars. If I push a bit harder with lots of overtaking to maintain a high
average speed then I get up around 10 l/100 km.

Driving in the city, with mostly 50 km/h in the suburbs or downtown and
occasional short stretches on the motorway I also get right around 10
l/100km. Many of the cars that use less than the Subaru on the open
road use considerably more than this in the city, while being much more
sluggish than the Subaru. Mitsubishi's seem to be an extreme example of
this.


I don't often drive larger cars, but recently I was driving a Ford
Territory eight hours a day on a contract job measuring mobile phone
data download speeds (CDMA EVDO). The Territory is a 4.0l AWD crossover
station wagon a litle bigger than an Outback:

http://www.webwombat.com.au/motoring/news_reports/ford-territory.htm

It was really rather pleasant to drive, with similar performance to a
2.5l Subaru and good handling and comfort, but the fuel consumption was
something else!

Overall we averaged 22 l/100km in city driving!

This is perhaps a little unfair to it, as most of that was driving in
the city at 30 - 40 km/h. At one point we did 100 km on a flat and
straight road with no traffic at a constant 109 km/h on the cruise
control and it averaged 13 l/100km, only about 45% more than the Subaru
would use in the same situation.

According to the computer's instantaneous readout, at 100 km/h it used
about 12 l/100km and at 80 km/h it used about 9 l/100km. I don't know
what the Subaru does at those speeds as it doesn't have a computer and
I've never had the opportunity or inclination to drive a significant
distance at a steady 80 km/h!