Howdy, Stranger!

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





Hyundai Elantra Real World MPG 2012

1141517192026

Comments

  • dsmith194dsmith194 Posts: 1
    I have a new 2012 Elentra and put on 4000 miles in the last three months. My average 26 MPG. I have tracked my mpg for highway driving and city driving with very little difference. What's up?
  • debbishaw1debbishaw1 Posts: 6
    I AVERAGE ABOUT 29 MPG, FOR A COMBO OF 50%HWY/50% CITY DRIVING.
    I THINK WE BEEN HAD.
  • edmund2460edmund2460 Posts: 293
    HI Fowler, aren't you the High Point Protege guy, we bought our Pro's about the same time there in 2001. Looks like you switched? I'm still driving my 2011 ES, it would look brand new except for a few light scratches (asses who keyed my car). Rides and handles beautifully, runs smooth, not ONE problem in 102K miles. Just wanted to say hi and hope everything's going well with you and whatever you are driving these days!
  • g2iowag2iowa Posts: 123
    Since you indicated you "have tracked my mpg", why not provide some substantive data with your query? Is yours a GLS or Limited? AT or MT?

    - What were some real tank results? How many miles did you drive and how many actual gallons did up put in the tank? What did the computer say about your AVG MPH were and MPG for the tank?
    - What type fuel are you using (e.g., FE-robbing ethanol)?
    - How fast are you driving on interstate?
    - Do you live in an area with a lot of road congestion on highways and in city?
    - Do you make a lot of short city trips (where engine doesn't get to optimal thermal efficiency and AT spends a lot of time in 1st-4th gears)?
    - Are you carrying any passengers or loads regularly?
  • g2iowag2iowa Posts: 123
    Would help people here if you'd provide some substantive data with your complaint. So hard to draw any conclusions when there is so little to go on. Is yours a GLS or Limited? AT or MT?

    - What were some real tank results? How many miles did you drive and how many actual gallons did up put in the tank? What did the computer say about your AVG MPH were and MPG for the tank?
    - What type fuel are you using (e.g., FE-robbing ethanol)?
    - How fast are you driving on interstate?
    - Do you live in an area with a lot of road congestion on highways and in city?
    - Do you make a lot of short city trips (where engine doesn't get to optimal thermal efficiency and AT spends a lot of time in 1st-4th gears)?
    - Are you carrying any passengers or loads regularly?
  • fowler3fowler3 Posts: 1,919
    Hi Nor:

    Yes, I am the one with the 2001 Pro, still going strong, with only 48K on the ODO.
    I moved closer to the healthcare and general services I need, which cut down on
    trip distances and gas used. Great little cars. Trading enters my mind occasionally, but I rarely see anything that justifies trading. One exception, if I could trade up, would be the Kia Rio-5 hatchback. Now, THERE is a car that's right for the times.

    Yes, it's small, but it has great utility, and loaded with the really new electronics features most of us would like, its a steal. Note that the side sheet-metal is void of creases which cost big bucks to remove if dented. Love the zoomy 21st Century Hyundai styling, but let it be somebody else's problem.

    Thanks fro posting, Nor. :D
  • g2iowag2iowa Posts: 123
    MT's July '12 issue has an update on their long-term '12 Elantra Limited test. In their 8 months and 16,218 miles they are averaging just 26.9 mpg. They point out that they finally almost hit 40 mpg on highway: "... with cruise control set at the speed limit (mercifully set at 70 [mph] most of the way) and the A/C off to do it, but he was able to get an entire highway tank to 39.77 mpg. He used 10.473 gallons and traveled 416.6 miles in the process."
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,710
    I'd be very happy with 40 mpg @ 70 mph. I almost never see speed limits that high, have to get out of town and that doesn't happen often. Most speed limits where I drive, in the Upper Midwest, are 55-65. So I should be able to average over 40 mpg highway on the Elantra.
  • g2iowag2iowa Posts: 123
    edited May 2012
    Just filled up after a rural 2-lane state highway excursion (with one passenger and temperatures in the 60s all day). I had cruise set at or around 60 mph for most of time. Since this was state highway, I did have a few periodic stops at or near small towns, but not too many and I didn't drive more than about 10 miles in a city. My avg. MPH was 52 and I ended up with 41.38 mpg. So I now have 4 good recent data points.

    - Avg MPH= 52 and achieved 41.38 MPG. Drove 243.4 miles and used 5.882 gals.
    - Avg MPH= 35 and achieved 35.45 MPG. Drove 231.4 miles and used 6.528 gals.
    - Avg MPH= 30 and achieved 32.68 MPG. Drove 292.0 miles and used 8.934 gals.
    - Avg MPH= 24 and achieved 29.46 MPG. Drove 258.5 miles and used 8.776 gals.

    All of these were with Active ECO "on", no A/C, and maximum use of cruise control. Used only regular unleaded (no ethanol). Car now has about 4,000 total miles on her; I'm going to get first oil change next week.

    Sadly, my computer continues to read high. It showed 45.4 mpg, which was off by 8.9% (too high).
  • m6userm6user Posts: 2,991
    Interesting. It sounds like you keep very good records. Do you have an overall avg mpg for the 4000 miles? I would imagine in areas that only have 10% ethanol laced gas that the avg mpg would be slightly less.
  • g2iowag2iowa Posts: 123
    Just adding up the four tankfuls above, I drove 1025.3 miles and used 30.12 gallons of regular unleaded. That gives me a combined 34.04 mpg, which is 3.2% above the EPA estimate of 33 mpg. So on the whole, I appear to be getting pretty close to the EPA estimate.

    Unless you drive 100% of time either city or highway, the only "real" number to work towards is the combined 33 EPA estimate. I figure anyone getting say 32-34 MPG overall combined should be entirely satisfied.

    But I will admit that I am focusing pretty hard on achieving FE when I drive. I share the car with someone else, but she only drives it maybe 1/3rd as much as I do. However, her computer estimate is always under mine as she doesn't give a whit about FE and every time I see where she has left the number, I try to raise it. Almost like a game.
  • m6userm6user Posts: 2,991
    edited June 2012
    Thanks. That's the number I always work for, the EPA combined. But I also like to check it obviously on long trips for the hwy number as well. The city number I don't bother with cause it's just too difficult for me as I've always got some kind of freeway miles in there.

    I figured since you're a very careful driver and concerned about economy that you''ve been keeping good records since you bought the car. 4000 miles would probably be around 11-13 fill ups. That's why I asked for an average over the whole 4000 miles. If you don't know that fine. I usually don't just measure 4 tanks of gas to determine a real average as there are a lot of seasonal and driving variables. I usually try to take about 6 fill ups a couple of times a year to give me a real good picture.

    If people get the EPA combined number that's great. If they are only getting an average of around 27-29 with the Elantra I would be concerned if I knew I was driving conservately as that is below even the EPA city rating.
  • dodgeman07dodgeman07 Posts: 573
    I just received the July 2012 issue of Car and Driver magazine and it contains an excellent article of 40mpg (and near-40mpg) compacts. The article, actually a series of articles, is one of the best I've seen with mileage tips (the usual), radar graphs, and a unique approach to measuring fuel efficiency.

    C&D used a "precision fuel-consumption meter" to determine the maximum speed the vehicles could obtain 40mpg. This is a key statistic not typically measured. The vehicles in the test included:

    1. Chevrolet Cruze Eco
    2. Ford Focus SE (not the SFE)
    3. Hyundai Elantra GLS
    4. Mazda 3 Skyactiv
    5. VW Golf TDI

    The results included C/D Observed Hwy mpg and the maximum speed at which 40mpg could be generated. Who won? The Golf TDI of course but the final tally was interesting. Here's the order of finish with the observed Hwy mpg then the max speed at which the magical 40mpg figure could be obtained.

    1. VW Golf TDI: 46 mpg hwy and 77 mph for 40 mpg.
    2. Mazda3 Sky: 45 mpg hwy and 76 mph for 40 mpg.
    3. Elantra GLS: 41 mpg hwy and 74 mph for 40 mpg.
    4. Cruze ECO: 36 mpg hwy and 69 mph for 40 mpg.
    5. Focus SE: 36 mpg hwy and 66 mph for 40 mpg.

    The Cruze was the loser here and Ford wasn't able to provide their high mpg SFE version Focus so that one's tossed out really. The Elantra did very well and Mazda's new 3 Skyactiv posted stunning numbers. The TDI performed as expected.
  • g2iowag2iowa Posts: 123
    Anyone interested in their own FE should get a complete data set for their specific car, tracking MPH-MPG.

    Just filled up after a real mix of downtown city, suburb, and highway driving, covering 25 mph to 70 mph. About 60% interstate at 70 mph posted speed limit and had 3 passengers for about half the driving. Temperatures in the 60s all day. I had cruise set at legal highway speeds (50-70 mph). My avg. MPH was 40 and I ended up with 36.75 mpg. So I now have 5 good recent data points. (Just need a 45 mph average point.)

    - Avg MPH= 52 and achieved 41.38 MPG. Drove 243.4 miles and used 5.882 gals.
    - Avg MPH= 40 and achieved 36.75 mpg. Drove 232.3 miles and used 6.321 gals.
    - Avg MPH= 35 and achieved 35.45 MPG. Drove 231.4 miles and used 6.528 gals.
    - Avg MPH= 30 and achieved 32.68 MPG. Drove 292.0 miles and used 8.934 gals.
    - Avg MPH= 24 and achieved 29.46 MPG. Drove 258.5 miles and used 8.776 gals.

    All of these were with Active ECO "on", little A/C, and maximum use of cruise control. Used only regular unleaded (no ethanol). Car now has about 4,200 total miles on her. My computer continues to read high. It showed 40.4 mpg, which was off by 9% (too high).
  • g2iowag2iowa Posts: 123
    Per the article, "Driving 200 miles at 73 mph on a freeway yielded C/D-observed HWY MPG numbers." So they were driving pretty fast.

    I'm not sure my Elantra GLS would get 40 mpg at constant 74 mph. Seems like her FE reaches a peak closer to 70 mph.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,710
    Must be "high MPG car" month with the press! CR's July issue focused (no pun intended) on several high-mpg compacts, that is, models specifically designed to get higher-than-normal mpg, including the Focus SFE, Cruze ECO, Civic HF. They also tested the Prius C. They previously tested the Mazda3i Skyactiv and Elantra, also the Golf and Jetta SportWagen TDIs.

    What they found was interesting and somewhat inline with the C/D report. Their average mpg on the previously-tested Elantra automatic was 29, and for the Mazda3 Skyactiv automatic was 32. The Corolla automatic was also 32. The Cruze ECO automatic averaged only 27 mpg (1 mpg better than a 1LT they previously tested); CR noted that the Sonata GLS and Camry LE they tested also averaged 27 mpg. The Focus SFE did better, averaging 31 mpg, 3 better than the Focus SE they previously tested. The Civic HF averaged 33 mpg, 3 better than the 30 they got on the LX. But they noted the Mazda3i Skyactiv and Corolla cost less than these and get 32 mpg. One place the Civic HF really stood out though was on highway FE: CR measured 49 mpg, which was better than the Prius C they tested, and tops all other gas-powered cars CR has tested. (Too bad C/D didn't include a Civic HF in their tests.) So someone who drives mostly on the highway might find the Civic HF appealing, if they can stand the rest of the car (CR declined to recommended it based on its overall test score).
  • m6userm6user Posts: 2,991
    I would not buy a Corolla in it's present form but one has to admit it gets very good MPG for a 4sp auto and no DI. It's a little wanting on the power but I've driven several(rentals) over the years and they seem to get around ok.
  • bhmr59bhmr59 Posts: 1,598
    Your average speed tests are just another way of measuring the average RPM as shown on the TACH. Everyone knows that 2,000 RPMs results in more speed with each higher gear.
  • g2iowag2iowa Posts: 123
    edited June 2012
    In the real world there are nearly an infinite number of ways someone might "average" 50 mph over the course of a couple of hundred miles of driving. For me, it is usually a unique combination of city, suburb, and highway miles that varies with each tank. The average MPH figure is readily available for the '12 Elantra driver to see for each tank and post here when commenting on their own achieved FE. I have far less confidence in postings when posters choose not to include readily available data that helps people better understand how they are driving in the real world. I suspect avg MPH are far LOWER for most posters than they think as they overestimate highway miles and underestimate city miles and time spent at stoplights/signs.
  • gman4911gman4911 Posts: 43
    I don't think that is the case with the Elantra. Let's say you have a full tank of gas. When you're idle, your rpms is around 900 rpm. The avg MPH calculation is updated anytime the engine is running even when idle. So if you allowed the car to idle for the full tank, your avg MPH and MPG would show 0. This is why you have to consider your avg MPH to understand why you get the MPG you're getting. More idle time indicates more stop and go type driving which adversely affects your fuel efficiency.
  • My Hyundai Elantra has barely even come close to the EPA estimates. At 90% highway driving, I was able to get 37mpg. This has been the best I have ever achieved. The next closest was 36mpg (once) and then 35mpg a couple times after. Most of the time though, I was getting high twenties to low thirties. I mentioned it to the dealership when it was still new and only had around 6k miles on it and they stated that once it broke-in, that it should get better. Well, at 16k miles, my mileage has continued to decline. So, I asked the dealership about it and they stated that if no check engine light was on, there was probably nothing wrong. I adamantly advised them that something must be wrong, so today they finally agreed to look at it. Well, they stated that the vehicle computer stated the vehicle was misfiring due to too much alcohol in the tank. First off, how did the alcohol get in there, and secondly why isn't it burning it up like any other car would. HEET is all alcohol and is used to remove water. It safely burns up and out along with any water, but I have not used any HEET product or put anything in my tank but gasoline. Generally Chevron or Texaco fuel. On occasion, (Road Trips) Shell or other gasoline, but I always try to stay with a big name brand. I don't cut corners on my fuel or maintenance. I have a 2001 Ford Escape bought new and have put 176k on it and have always used the same fuel and maintenance schedule and it purrs like it always has. So, my question is what type of BS is this their giving me? Too much alcohol in the tank? Why won't the vehicle burn it up like any other vehicle? Also, they are stating that it won't be covered under warranty (Big surprise) and that I have to replace the spark plugs (16k miles) and drain the tank and remove all the alcohol. Again, this crappy gas mileage has been since new, and steadily declined. We don't live in a cold climate and don't have a lot of stop and go traffic. Also, the last fill-up showed me 23mpg. My average is 25mpg. No heavy foot driving as its my wife's car and she drives VERY conservative. Sounds like Hyundai has no idea why it's misfiring and made up this bogus story.......
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,710
    Any chance that some E85 was accidentally put into the tank? Does anyone but you ever put gas into the car?
  • gman4911gman4911 Posts: 43
    If I were you, I'd verify the OBD code. It's possible a sensor is malfunctioning. If you don't have a code scanner, go to Advanced Auto Parts or AutoZone and borrow one.
  • g2iowag2iowa Posts: 123
    When you wrote, "At 90% highway driving, I was able to get 37mpg. This has been the best I have ever achieved. The next closest was 36mpg (once) and then 35mpg a couple times after.", you didn't say anything about how fast you were driving. If you are driving over 70 mph, you can't expect to see max highway FE. And if you are driving at 75-80 mph, then getting 35 or so mpg would likely be pretty reasonable.
  • No kidding Sherlock. Like this is the first car I have ever owned. Are you serious? Obviously these cars were tested under NON-real world driving scenarios, with NON realistic uses of the vehicle (no AC) etc. All this tells me is that they are trying to fudge the numbers and to deceive people into thinking that if they use the vehicle (normally) on normal highways and with normal city driving conditions, that they will achieve the stated MPG's. As you clearly stated above, that is NOT THE CASE. Deception seems to be a normal marketing strategy in this day and age. Why not be honest with people? I know this would probably be a new concept, but wow, nobody would be able to have any legitimate complaints, unless there really was an issue with the vehicle. It's when deception meets reality is when issues arise. How about this novel idea, test ALL the vehicles at 65, 70 & 75 MPH for highway tests? Wow, that seems to be the speed of most highways and freeways. Novel idea?

    For everyone that has a legitimate complaint like myself, continue reading below, for all others, take a hike.

    Ok, lets throw highway out the window for now, since we know they are false tests, and that it's just deception at its best. Ok, my 2011 Hyundai Elantra is stated to get 29MPG city? Well, what type of deceptive test were used to achieve that number? I have NEVER been able to get anywhere near that number? My combined city/highway average is 25MPG. I don't even want to know how bad strictly city driving would be. I don't have a large city like a lot of people here, and I try to use the roadways with the least amount of lights, so I don't understand how it's even possible to get 29MPG. I guess I use the A/C, so there it is. I'm guilty of using the vehicle under normal driving conditions. You got me Hyundai with your false tests, or what ever company they are PAYING to achieve these ridiculous (unrealistic) numbers.

    Here's an idea. How about some of the other car companies who's car's can achieve their stated MPG's come on board and stomp these liars into the dirt?
    Why don't these other manufactures take these other car companies to court and get them to at least, post real numbers. I would have most likely bought a Chevy Cruz or Toyota Camry had I known this car would have been so far off the numbers. I can tell you one thing, my experience with Hyundai so far, tells me I WILL NOT recommend them or buy another vehicle from them. The only way I will have respect for this company at this point is if they come clean with owners that are not getting the stated MPG's and provide compensation or offer an option with hugh incentives to get into another model that gets the stated numbers. Or, they can work on my car and at least get it closer than 11MPG off the normal stated average. I can accept 2-3 mpg off, but 11MPG off is hugh. Don't believe me, my Chevy pickup pulling a 21' fully loaded travel trailer at 75-80 MPH didn't even drop 11MPG. It dropped 8MPG, which is expected when pulling a heavy parachute behind you, especially at those speeds.
  • gman4911gman4911 Posts: 43
    edited June 2012
    If you know that the EPA tests are not under real-world driving condtions, then why are you trying to apply it to real-world conditions?

    The primary purpose of the EPA tests are to allow people to compare one car to another under the exact same test conditions. If there was no standardized test, there'd be no way to fairly compare one car to another.

    As far as your assertion that Hyundai is fudging the numbers, sure it's possible, but they didn't. All the car mfrs test their cars the exact same way under the exact same conditions using parameters specified by the EPA. There was an instance where, I think it was BMW, who had to revise their numbers down after the EPA found the numbers that BMW submitted to be high. The EPA has verified Hyundai's numbers and their results were the same as what Hyundai reported.

    The bottom line is that the closer your driving conditions are to the test conditions, the easier it is to attain the EPA results. This is why the window stickers always specify a range of what you can expect. The more you deviate from the test conditions, the more likely your results will differ, for better or worse. There are many people who've been able to exceed the EPA numbers, myself included.
  • maxx4memaxx4me Posts: 1,340
    edited June 2012
    Sorry for those who continue to deny, but where there is smoke, there is very likely a fire burning somewhere. My Vibe is rated 26/31. I get 33 in summer driving with a light foot. That is all suburban driving. I get 28 when I drive like a maniac. I just got 41 on all highway with the cruise control and maintaining the speed limit and carrying my golf clubs, luggage and a 2.5 ton jack in case of emergency. So there was enough weight to simulate a second person in the car. So, right now, with a very light foot, I am able to attain 33/41 on a car rated 26/31. Please don't slam the Elantra drivers who are not coming close to EPA ratings. There is something clearly amiss when so many have complained. I would not be happy either. All I can add is that they were brave enough to post their issues, and it has influenced my next car purchase. I will NOT be buying an Elantra. My Corolla-Vibe is far exceeding the EPA numbers, and many Yaris owners are doing so also. So for those who have "informed the electorate," I thank you for keeping me from stepping into the same troubles, and I wish you better mileage when your car's engine hits the sweet spot. Mine seemed to have occured right around 50,000 miles.
  • g2iowag2iowa Posts: 123
    What seems more than a little odd to me is that many of the people complaining the most are those that provide the least information about the actual details of specific tank fill ups (how many miles driven and how many gals used) or how they are actually driving. For example, the Elantra's computer provides you average MPH data. So anyone complaining about FE can readily provide this info for any tank of fuel. But so many don't; they just complain. Why? They could also provide relevant info on things like how fast they are driving on interstate, if they use ethanol, carrying passengers, make lots of short trips, do a lot of stop-and-go driving in city, how many miles are on odometer, etc. Anyone complaining would have far more credibility if they provided as much info as possible so others could see how they are actually driving. Just complaining doesn't help anyone understand anything.
  • g2iowag2iowa Posts: 123
    So...how fast are you choosing to drive on interstate? Are you using cruise control? Ethanol? What is the average MPH figure for some of your recent fill ups? I'd love to have the relevant info to see what might be going on and why. If you drive 80 mph on interestate, you won't get 40 mpg and it wouldn't be realistic to expect it. You should study the EPA methodology for the FE numbers.
  • eweinereweiner Posts: 36
    There are so many rocket scientists on this thread its really silly.

    The facts are really quite obvious and all of the details you are requesting will do little to change these facts.

    The Elantra is only capable of achieving 40MPG under very specific conditions that most drivers do not experience on a regular basis.

    Every single report of 40MPG has been on a relatively flat highway going 65 to 70 in warm clear weather and no AC. That's it. I, for one, do not live where the speed limit is higher than 55, and its hot in the summer and cold in the winter.

    I have only experienced 40MPG when I reset my MPG right before entering the highway. I can then see 40 but only if I drive like an old man.

    The second I am off the highway the 40 is gone. I mean REALLY gone. The local MPG on the Elantra is terrible so if the car is getting 40MPG more often it is completely masked by the rotten local MPG. And dont get me started on what happens when you add AC.

    My driving is 70/30 mix of highway and city with the average trip of about 40 highway miles on work days. The rest is local driving. Average MPH 39. I have monitored my tanks since I bought the car and in 6 months of direct measurement at the pump I have seen about 32 MPG.

    I am lucky, my MPG is not bad....so many others are worse. The Elantra is a let down as a 40MPG car. And in a few other ways like seat comfort, drive stability, engine idle, constant air circulation you cannot shut off, intermittent bluetooth etc...
Sign In or Register to comment.