Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Real world mileage with 2.5 and CVT

13

Comments

  • easypareasypar ColoradoPosts: 186
    edited August 2011
    Amen on the slowing down bit. Back in '08 (the last time gas spiked) we were doing a fair amount of back and forth from TX to CO that was just long enough that it couldn't be done in one day. We routinely drove at 60 or so and often got 30 mpg +/- from my (former) '93 Maxima with 3.5 liter and my wife's '04 Lexus RX-330.
  • occkingoccking Posts: 346
    Have had my 11 Outback 2.5 for 10 months now, just passed 26k. I do mostly highway driving. For the last four fillups, have averaged (based on consumption, not the onboard computer that always shows higher than actual (by about 5%) have averaged slightly over 30 mpg. I last reset the trip computer 5000 miles ago and it reads 30.6, and I know the actual over that period of time darn close to 30. It's either the warmer weather or car getting broken in, for the first few months (October to April or so was averaging around 27.

    I fill the tank to the brim every time, so I know my calculations are correct. One of these days I will run out of luck, on three occasions I have put 18.7 plus gallons in, once I even squeezed 19 gallons (take supposed to be 18.5 gallons.

    Also when you have approx 100 miles to go, seems like the minuted it drops down to 80 or 70 miles to go, that's when the idiot light comes on. But, don't plan on going 70 or 80 miles further as that number is optomistic.
  • almattialmatti Posts: 164
    occking: That practice of going past the Fumes to E in the tank is not really adviseable. No matter what Gas you buy, there's always some sort of silt or dirt in there that usually settles in the tank. Taking iot down to below 1/4 tank is not a good prcatice. You won't be looking forward to engine problems or clogged gas filters that will stop you in your tracks when you least expect it. Who needs that Headache...Just some friendly advise from an "old Man"...
  • skomanskoman Posts: 24
    I have had a 2010 since March 2010 and put 36,000miles on in 18 mo, and averaging 74-79mph freeway I regularly get 31-32 on the freeway. If I keep it at 69 or less it goes into the 33s no problem.
  • I could never understand this logic. The fuel pick up in your tank is always located on the bottom of the tank so what difference does it make if the tank is full or not? If there's sediment in the bottom of the tank it will get picked up even when full. Plus the fact that modern cars have fuel injection that use a fuel return line for the extra gas that the fuel pump sends to the engine and then isn't needed so as your tanks gets lower the fuel left has actually been passed through the fuel filter multiple times making it even cleaner. But is bad to go too low as this can damage the fuel pump as it requires the fuel for cooling.
  • skomanskoman Posts: 24
    I agree, I had an 1997 Ouback Sport and I would run the tank down to fumes regularly and had zero issues and it was at 214,000 miles and running strong when I sold it (my mistake since that car was a tank and ran like a swiss watch). Same for 2000 Outback and 2010 Legacy with less miles.
  • Maybe it's just me, but I think a diesel would be a near perfect fit for Subaru...torque torque and more torque with amazing fuel economy...just look at the Volkswagen TDIs! Diesels would fit in perfect (IMHO) with Subaru's image as a rugged safe vehicle. Let Toyota and the others have hybrids, diesel would be a great way to go for Subaru.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I agree, but they have to get their current diesel engine to meet CARB emissions first. Right now it doesn't.
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,587
    edited October 2011
    Why would they need to meet CARB to bring it over? The majority of the states don't require that level of emissions standards (yet), so they could sell a fair bunch of them at the federal level while they feel out the market and work toward CARB. That's assuming, of course, that the car will meet federal requirements as is or with minor tweaking.
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    They don't *have* to, but to not sell it in Cali would limit sales, as that's where a lot of green buyers are to begin with.
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 7,916
    edited October 2011
    They don't *have* to, but to not sell it in Cali would limit sales, as that's where a lot of green buyers are to begin with.

    More importantly, many Subie strong holds follow CARB: CT, ME, MA, VT, NY, RI, OR, WA all follow CARB.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    And Subaru has 7% market share in VT, vs. just 0.5% in Florida, last time I saw a state-by-state break down.

    That's the best and worst states for them, FWIW.
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,587
    All the more reason to roll it out now. If the cars sell well in states such as Alaska, Colorado, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Wisconsin, etc., then there's probably a pretty good argument to invest in CARB compliance for those other markets.

    Those states include:

    Arizona (2012 model year), Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington, as well as the District of Columbia.
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    MD - so no diesel Subaru for me. That's why I want a CARB-compliant one!
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 7,916
    The 14 CARB states I would say represent about 50% of all Subaru sales. Further, they are some of the most populous states in the country.

    Why would Suburu offer a vehicle that can't be sold in a vast market?

    Also, dealers in states like NH sell pretty much only CARB rated vehicles because they don't want to lose sales to border dwellers in the CARB states that surround them. I'm sure northern VA dealers are the same way.
  • dcm61dcm61 Posts: 1,475
    Why would Suburu offer a vehicle that can't be sold in a vast market?

    They still offer the Tribeca. :confuse:
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,587
    Because they already have it and it would sell. Like I already said, if they offered their current machine for sale now (assuming the CARB requirement is the only impediment), then they could feel out the market further to see if it is even worthwhile to pursue CARB compliance. Besides, I'm sure they could also sell it in Canada, so why lose sales and frustrate customers because of one state's emissions requirements (that other states have voluntarily adopted)?

    I'm all for "clean cars." At some point, however, one has to recognize that there is a certain level of demonization occurring when it comes to diesel fuel, regardless of the fact that vastly better fuel economy can be achieved from a diesel engine with all other things being equal.

    We can cut off our nose to spite our face, but that sure makes it difficult to tell when something stinks.... And, I'm not talking about diesel fumes! :P
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 7,916
    You are looking at it from a consumer perspective and wouldn't it be great if I could get a Subie diesel. From a business perspective, it doesn't make sense to sell a unique engine/model in certain states. It makes for fractured marketing, more difficult logistics, et al.

    AFAIK, other than new model rollouts, no manufacturer is selling particular engine models in only specific states. It's an all or nothing propostition. Further, I believe a new engine/model combination would require complete EPA and NHTSA testing before going on sale. Spending that money to sell a vehicle to less than half the population of the market doesn't make sense.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    The high cost of getting it all certified and federalized means they won't do it if they can't sell it everywhere.
  • easypareasypar ColoradoPosts: 186
    This is definitely true. Back in the '70s (when emisssion/safety rules were being met by band aid type "fixes") Porsche made all US export, probably all LEFT HAND DRIVE models to California specs. IIRC 90% of their US sales were to CA so that was the way to go. Since 911s weren't that plentiful on the Autobahn CA was possibly a majority of total sales.

    easypar
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,587
    I just think it would be great for them to give a big FU to California! If more manufacturers did that, the public pressure might actually make a positive difference in all our lives.
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 7,916
    Well that's a political argument, not an market based one. Even if it were useful in this case, do you really think Subaru would be the one to do it? After all their image is all about peace, love and understanding - that's the California way.
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,587
    Hahah; no, that's NOT the California way.

    If Subaru is willing to sell a car like the Tribeca, which has been a bomb since day one and was built primarily for the NA market, then surely they can take a chance on the Forester diesel, which would NOT be a bomb (even if they had only 2/3 of their potential market).

    I think they're more likely worried that it would cannibalize their gasoline-engined sales, and it would, but not to an extreme level. For example, I'd buy one in a heartbeat but am otherwise not likely to purchase a Subaru for my next vehicle.
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    edited October 2011
    What they need to estimate is how many incremental sales a diesel would bring if it was offered to only half of America, and then whether the costs of certification would justify it. Tribeca is already paid for, certified, and notice they have not updated the powertrain since 2008.

    It would be a pretty big gamble, and Subaru is ultra-conservative.

    Don't get me wrong, I'd *LIKE* to see one, but given their track record it's soooo not happening it's not even funny.
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,587
    it's soooo not happening it's not even funny.

    There's no doubt about that at all. Knowing Subaru, they'll probably wait until the market is already doused with diesels, and then it will be just another contender.

    Right now, they could really make an impact. You say markets like Florida are not Subaru strongholds, but put a >40mpg car into the mix, and I don't think having AWD would even be a factor any more. It certainly wouldn't detract from it. Really, the uptake rate is going to depend on the premium associated with the engine. If they can keep it as a sub-$30K offering at MSRP, it'll be a hit (and not just in the northern climates).
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Exactly. They will be the 7th diesel entry in the compact crossover segment, after VW, Honda, Toyota, Mazda, Chevy, and Jeep. :sick:

    Forester diesel, right now, for $25-28k. Hire extra accountants to count the money.
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,587
    I might even apply! :shades:
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
  • 6000 miles, one long trip from Reno to Seattle and back. Overall trip mileage was 29.6 mpg. That is what it was, up and back. Never over 30. Around Reno, mileage is averaging 27 something. We are mountainous, above 4000 feet, which will change mileage. The car has lots of power...more so than the 2000 Forester we traded in with 200,000 miles. Lots more cush! We just got the basic model and I put in the Bluetooth accessory. Took both of us a while to get used to driving with the CVT transmission...like driving a 1955-56 Buick with its DynaFlow transmission on steroids! I read some reports that people were claiming 35-36 mpg with the CVT Outbacks....Horse hockey...Maybe going downhill for 500 miles..but not in the real world.....
  • skyiceskyice Posts: 21
    edited November 2011
    My car is 2011 outback 2.5 i. I got an average 20.1 MPG since I bought it, about 3900miles now, mostly city roads. 20.1 MPG is acceptable to me. However, it gets worse now. I filled up the gas tank when the low fuel light was on (for the first time) yesterday. The number on "distance(or mile) to empty" meter dropped very quickly from 330miles (full tank) to 260 miles for only a 20 miles drive. You may say I should not trust the digit meter. But I did a calculation between two fill-up before. 16.6 liters for 105 KM or 15.7 l/100km or 15mpg, that is a lot to me. Does anyone has any idea on this? I just saw too many good MPG in this forum, which makes me feel upset. :cry:
  • easypareasypar ColoradoPosts: 186
    Three points here;

    1. Not very many miles yet, probably haven't had your first oil change, right?
    IIRC it took me until about 8,000 miles to start getting pretty good mileage.

    2. All town driving will definitley kill the average.

    3. The computer seems to recalculte almost every mile so don't go by the onboard DTE numbers.

    If I spend a week or so driving around town and then fill up for a trip to Vail mine will say mayber 300 miles DTE when I get on the interstate highway. By the time I've driven the 50 or so miles down to Denver it will read 380 DTE, by the time I've driven to Vail (all uphill) it may still say 280-300 DTE.

    Usually my car doesn't move once I've parked it at a ski area. When I drive back to Denver (all downhill) it may read 350 DTE and then back around 300 when I get home.

    If it's really bad on actual (you calculate) mileage then maybe check to make sure there isn't a loose connection around the air cleaner. Not sure why there would be but on my wife's Lexus they used to always lose one of the screws when they would check the filter at oil changes. The first time I realized they were doing this was when we had the oil changed the night before a trip from Austin to Denver. I could almost see the fuel gauge moving and had to buy gas before we got to Abilene!

    easypar
Sign In or Register to comment.