Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Hyundai Elantra Real World MPG 2012

1568101116

Comments

  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    In the case he was speaking of yes, that is the case. He was speaking of city driving, not cruising along at 65 MPH (at which point the Elantra, from what I hear, is actually slightly BELOW 2000 RPM). When you're going back and forth between zero and 45 MPH, and then back down to 30 and back up, you can only stay below 3000 RPM if you have sufficient low-end torque. Which is why I'd like to see the Elantra's power curve on a graph: if the engine has insufficient low-end torque that COULD be a factor in the difficulty if getting the EPA rating.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    edited March 2012
    I rarely hit 3000 RPM in ANY car, even those with less power and torque than the Elantra. The problem with most drivers is they have a lead foot and accelerate more quickly than they need to under most circumstances. They also don't know or choose to apply the art of coasting whenever practical. Even merging onto a freeway, if the right lane is clear, there's no need to gun it. Sure, there's times when it's necessary to floor it. I find I need to do that, oh, once a month or so. And I live in a large metro area with nearly 3 million people. Did I always drive this way? No. When I was younger and in a much greater hurry because I was soooo important :P I mashed the pedal pretty well. But gas was less than a buck a gallon back then. :)
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Yeah, you may live in a large metro area, but I got you beat: I live in NY state, bwa ha ha, and commute every day on the primary highway artery between my suburb and White Plains. One thing you can NOT do is accelerate any less quickly than you need to. There are times when I've had to get to 60 on an on-ramp just to be able to merge into traffic. There are people who think 70 is too slow for the passing lane (or the slow lane for that matter). So quite often there is a need for a somewhat mroe leaden foot than you might consider "needed." I've actually set the cruise to 65 and been passed by PRIUSES.

    And to top it all off, all gas is 10% ethanol, 100% of the time now (used to be winter only).
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    A lot of eastern states have very short on-ramps which makes for some interesting merge scenarios. In most other areas of the country the on-ramps are much longer(and safer IMO) so one can time the merge pretty well without stomping on the gas pedal to the floor unless the freeway is really congested.

    I mentioned the lower torque of the Elantra in regards to potential city mpg earlier. If somebody is used to a certain take off speed and they have a car with less torque they may tend to stomp on it a bit more to get up to the speed they are used to. This could cause very poor city mpg which would obviously affect combined mpg.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    You ever seen a cloverleaf? Merging lane doesn't get much shorter than that. Got a lot of 'em in my town. Still it's possible to avoid mashing the accelerator most of the time if you watch traffic. Timing is everything. :)

    I think 40 years of driving helps, most of which has been in the same metro area. When I was younger, I floored it all the time when entering a freeway and hoped I'd be able to zip ahead of whatever traffic is there. Now I observe better, anticipate better, time my approach better. When I need to floor it, I floor it. I just find I don't have to most of the time. But I don't live in NYC either.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    edited March 2012
    Yes, I've seen cloverleafs....who hasn't??? But it really doesn't matter if the on-ramp is straight or round. It is the length of the merge lane itself at the end of the on-ramp that makes the difference. The cloverleaf makes it a little more difficult to build speed gradually but if the merge lane is long enough it shoudl present no problem. The merge lane is very short in some areas of the country and nearly non-existent is some areas. If traffic is heavy it is very hard to merge without a lot of gas unless you want to cause a bunch of brake lights and near misses. Planning is great but the circumstances still have to be favorable.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Correct. There are literally on-ramps up here that are no more than a couple of car lengths, and some of the parkway on-ramps actually use stop signs instead of yield signs. That could also make location a factor in the Elantra's MPG problems, and I frankly haven't checked to see where the MPG problems have been clustered. And I still can't find the torque curve for the 2012 Elantra.
  • g2iowag2iowa Member Posts: 123
    edited April 2012
    The discussion about the relationship of MPG to gearing and RPMs (esp. for ATs at speeds under 45 mph) is highly correlated to average MPH. Anyone looking at their MPG in the '12 Elantra also absolutely needs to look at the corresponding average MPH figure at the same time for the same tank.

    So far few posters here have shown a real MPG issue when their average MPH are say in the 45-55 MPH range. When it is they tend to achieve around 36-42 MPG. The AT is getting into top overdrive gearing as quickly as possible and staying there keeping RPMs low and FE high.

    It is the city driving that is the issue. Even though I'd swear on my eternal soul that my avg. MPH are over 25 MPH, the computer says they are not. So when my avg MPH is say 21 MPH or 23 MPH, I know I've spent a lot of time going 0-25 mph and 25-0 mph. Start and stop traffic. Rarely even gets to stay into 4th gear for very long. In this case I shouldn't (and don't) expect to get 30 MPG, so I'm happy getting 26-28 MPG.

    Since my other car is an MT, I do wish there were more MT owners posting here. I'd like to see what they are getting for city MPG. When I drive my MT I watch stop lights and posted speed limits. I do all I can to stay at 3rd or 4th gear most of the time. Doing anything and everything I can to avoid 1st and 2nd gears without lugging. I'm normally pretty successful so my '04 IS300 with a 3.0L V6 usually gets me 25 MPG city even though the EPA sticker is far less. But this is because I have complete control over the gearing and choose the gears that max FE. (And I minimize use of the clutch; she has about 130,000 miles and she is on her original clutch). But I can't even use the Elantra manu-matic feature in the AT if the computer doesn't like the gear selected. So no 4th gear at 20 mph on level ground. I can't get to 4th until 25 mph. And I have to wait to get into 5th and 6th, far longer than I would if I had an MT.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Many people report having trouble getting near the 40mpg hwy even when babying and driving in the same manner they've driven other cars that DID achieve the EPA numbers. If they've done that in the past, why are they having so much trouble doing it with their new Elantra?

    Very few people drive like you do. The EPA testing, while maybe not real world for everybody, tries to replicate many driving scenarios. They don't drive just 55mph straight to get the highway number as many people think. If one has to drive like you do(nothing wrong with it but it just seems extreme) to get the EPA numbers than that is just ridiculous. I think some people have Elantras that may not be performing correctly no matter how hard they try to be frugal.

    I love it when some Elantra owners pipe up something like "well, my Elantra is doing fine so you must be just doing something wrong". Does anyone ever consider that a small percentage of Elantras may not be performing to specs while theirs is ok? All cars don't come off the line 100% correct all the time. That's what recalls are all about.

    I read many boards on these forums and I've never seen as many complaints about the inablility of a car to achieve close to the EPA numbers, either the hwy or the combined. The only other vehicle that I can remember seeing a large number like this was the Chevy Equinox and even that didn't seem to as many.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Take a look at the Subaru Impreza 2012 discussion here. Quite a few reports on fuel economy although the car has been available only since last fall. Very few owners are reporting that they can meet the EPA ratings.

    There were some posts awhile back on a reflash for the Elantra that apparently resulted in significantly improved fuel economy. I am surprised we aren't hearing more about that.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Yes, that reflash seemed to be a flash-in-the-pan so to speak. ;)

    I'm starting to really wonder about a lot these compacts and the methods they are using to reach those huge mpg numbers. It seems like the midsizers are doing just as well overall with a lot more room and little extra cost. Makes you wonder where the value is unless you just absolutely want a smaller exterior dimension vehicle which I realize a lot of people do.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Don't forget the Elantra has a mid-sized interior. :)

    Also I don't think ANY current mid-sized sedan that isn't a hybrid or diesel can touch 40 mpg on the highway. Some compacts including the Elantra (at least in some hands!) can. You also won't see upper 20s to low 30s mpg in mixed driving on ordinary mid-sized sedans... mid-20s is typical for the class. And compacts cost less in general than mid-sizers, e.g. an Elantra GLS will run you about $2k or more less than a Sonata GLS.

    I am one of those people who prefer a car with smaller outside dimensions. But I don't mind a roomy interior. Which is one reason I like the Elantra.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Don't forget the Elantra has a mid-sized interior.

    That's why I specifically said "exterior dimensions". I agree with everything you've said but still believe the value proposition is getting hazier. Wheelbase is wheelbase and a longer wheelbase has a nicer ride in just about any car.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Nicer ride, probably. More fun ride, probably not.

    Better fuel economy--no.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Plus they're bigger on the outside, which isn't always a good thing (personally I refer a tight turning circle and tidy exterior dimensions for maneuverability).
  • crankeeecrankeee Member Posts: 298
    edited April 2012
    Backy: Our 2012 Sonata GLS was $19,700 with all incentives and the POP package, floor mats, trunk mat + tax.title docs. $20,754 OTD. We did not steal it but good deal and great dealer for service.
    About $2000 over Elantra as you say. We see 24-25 in all city driving and at 65-70 highway 36-37.6 MPG. At 75-80 the MPG drops off to 33-34. As posted by others, the city stop and go is what is affecting the "average" MPG enjoyed by drivers. To get better than mid 20's, as you post, you need a Hybrid running some battery only time or a roller skate with lower mass & weight to move. Sonata is a good tradeoff of city/highway MPG, but it is definately tuned for highway as is the Elantra. 6-speed AT shifts up fast and down slower so highway MPG benefits more at 50 MPH to 65.
    Great cars that deliver good driveability, value for the money and EPA MPG in the most conditions with "most" drivers. Good luck and enjoy new car.
    We are truly blessed in this country to have good cars, good roads and cheap gas (at least for now!).
  • sustain2020sustain2020 Member Posts: 1
    edited April 2012
    Drive smooth(no rabbit starts or stops) and at or under the speed limit, you know...legally, and your mileage will improve by at least 20%. Or, just trade it in for a Prius C for about the same purchase price but at least 30% better real world mileage. No problems with Toyota hybrid batteries with over a million Prii on the road now. Look it up....Consumer Reports, used Prii prices, etc. Prius C should be the same....you'll thank me when gas hits $5.50 next year and $7 a gallon a few years from now.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Have you seen the replacement cost for Prius batteries at the 8 year mark???
  • gozonergozoner Member Posts: 3
    The website fuelly.com allows people to report and to track their mpgs. Unfortunately, I searched around at fuelly.com for the recent Hyundai claimed 40 mpg cars; the news is not good. I looked at 2011 models because the 2012 models don't have enough people reporting to be statistically significant. The average mpgs reported for the cars are:

    33.3 - Sonata Hybrid
    32.3 - Accent
    32.0 - Veloster
    30.4 - Elantra

    Even worse, barely a single person averages the Hyundai hwy mpg or above.

    You'd think the people going through the effort to track their mileage would generally be people who are driving conservatively. As the numbers show, even these people are not getting good numbers.

    One could argue that "well all cars do worse than the EPA numbers." Not so. Among 40 mpg (or nearly so) cars that average better than the EPA Highway are: Volkswagen Golf TDI, Honda Insight and Honda CR-Z. In addition, cars average at or better than the EPA Combined are: Lexus CT200h, Smart ForTwo, Volkswagen Jetta TDI and Audi A3 TDI.

    Do your own investigation at Hyundai at Fuelly
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Quit comparing the results to hybrids and diesels. Compare to similar cars like the Focus, Cruze, Mazda3, etc. Nobody should expect to average the hwy EPA numbers. Who thought that one up? Look at the EPA combined and see if owners are reporting that kind of number.
  • gozonergozoner Member Posts: 3
    edited April 2012
    I compared near 40 mpg cars irrespective of technology. 40 mpg is 40 mpg. Do your own comparison.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    No need to get snotty. I was just suggesting comparing it to it's peers rather than to different techs. Hybrids and diesels are so different than gassers that I thought it would be more meaningful. Do as you wish, I could care less.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    The Mazda3 is averaging 30.6 to the Elantra's 30.2. That's averaging ALL Mazda3 models, including the 2.5L engine with the rotten FE, yet it's averaging better MPGs than an Elantra lineup of 100% "40 MPG" engines.

    Now, if you look at the details, some people with SkyActiv engines are reporting pretty low MPGs, around 25. But quite a few others are reporting over 35 MPG. Not very many Elantras are reporting over 35 MPG. In fact, I think 6 out of the 92 2011 Elantras (about 6.5%) reported north of 35 MPG, versus 9 of the 45 2012 Mazda3s (20%). If you want to go with 2012, 9 2012 Elantras reported north of 35 MPG, out of 114 ( about 8%).
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Yes, the Mazda3 is kind of hazy as it can include one of 3 different engines for 2012 and, like you said, the 2.5L sucks gas. I'm pretty certain from looking at the entries that actually say they have a skyactive that the avg will be a fair amount higher than the avg it's at now.

    Actually for all the buzz about the Elantra and it's mpg, 30.2 isn't all that bad considering all the different kinds of driving and conditions. There's probably a lot more people that do a lot of city driving than do mostly freeway. Just a guess on my part on that one though.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    I'm still convinced that a lack of low-end-torque is at the root of the problem, and people are probably being a little more generous with the throttle to compensate. I wonder if real-world the Veloster Turbo might actually get better mileage, given how generous it is on low-end torque?
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    Yes, the engine changed. In 2010 they used a 2.0L and changed to a 1.8L in the 2011 model going forward. HP went up but torque went down. May help to explain why the city MPG isn't resulting in happy campers. Have to press hard to get ooomph off the line.

    Above is what I posted a week ago on this forum. I still think, as you do, there is something to it.

    As far as the Veloster goes, I wouldn't expect any turbo model to get better mpg unless it is extremely babied and what fun would that be. I don't think the people buying the Veloster Turbo are necessarily looking for maximum mpg.
  • gozonergozoner Member Posts: 3
    The root of the problem is that Hyundai didn't derate their EPA tests. If they had reported 27/30/35 the world would be raving about the stylish, feature-full, relatively inexpensive cars!
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    With a torque peak at 1750 RPM they'll probably baby the engine without even realizing it, all the while praising the gobs of torque. :shades:
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    The Civic and Corolla have less power and torque than the Elantra. So why aren't there tons of complaints about their fuel economy?

    I do think that many drivers do "floor it" (i.e. use more than optimal accelerator pressure) and thus get less than expected fuel economy. I've been doing some experimentation the past few days on my Sentra, which has an instantaneous mpg meter (as does the Elantra). It's rated only 27/34 but with the CVT it's capable of better fuel economy than that... IF you use a light foot. My tests have shown me just how light a touch is needed to get best fuel economy. I'll drive w/o glancing at the mpg meter, then check it. Usually it's not very good. Then I adjust pedal pressure to get mpg as high as possible. What I've found is there isn't much difference in pressure between "not very good" mpg and optimal mpg. The difference in mpg can be huge, though... as in 20s to 30s, or 30s to 40s-50s (meter pegs out at 60).

    I would not be surprised to find the same thing true on the Elantra. I haven't done that kind of experiment with it before, but next time I drive one I will.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    The Civic and Corolla have less power and torque than the Elantra. So why aren't there tons of complaints about their fuel economy?

    IMO it's because they both easily beat their respective EPA estimates. People buy these cars for economy not HP. I don't think they are so worried about a few HP as long as the car will get out of it's own way. Fuel economy is pretty much #1 criteria. So when they surpass the EPA they are happy campers and when they don't even get close...they complain.

    Somebody just mentioned it earlier and I can kind of see their point. If Hyundai would have reduced the EPA numbers to say 27/38 instead of 29/40 this might be a moot issue. It's all about the expectations. I know the "40 MPG" thing is great marketing but make sure the car can get it fairly easily by average driving techniques or you have a situation like this.
  • gman4911gman4911 Member Posts: 43
    edited April 2012
    >>>The root of the problem is that Hyundai didn't derate their EPA tests.
    Why should they? It's the same test applied to all cars. If that's the results of the test, that's the results of the test.

    It's the parameters of the tests that should be questioned. For instance, the EPA tests uses 100% gas not the 10% ethanol blend that the public uses. You'll lose up to 10% FE on just that alone.

    The max acceleration rate for the city/hwy tests are 3.3/3.2 mph. You'll lose a few % FE if you exceed that rate.

    The city test does not simulate rush hour traffic. Traffic light idle times in the test avg 30 sec or less. In the real world, idle times during rush hour can be as much as 150 sec or more. Most people lose a few % FE because rush hour driving is part of their daily drive.

    The tests don't include climbing hills. You'll lose a few % FE if hills are part of your commute.

    The tests don't include weather. You'll lose a few % FE driving into head winds.

    I'm fairly certain everyone can get the EPA numbers IF they drove the car exactly the same way the car was tested.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Excellent points, especially on acceleration and rush hour traffic. If I use heavier than normal pedal pressure and do a lot of true "city" driving, especially in colder weather, I have a hard time hitting the EPA estimates. But with easy acceleration, light traffic (less idling), and moderate weather I always exceed EPA estimates, in any car--including the Elantra. Despite ethanol-laced fuel.

    20% of 25 is 5 mpg. But 20% of 40 is 8 mpg. The higher the possible fuel economy rating of a car, the higher the expectations but also the bigger drop-off in mpg's in absolute terms due to factors that affect fuel economy.
  • crankeeecrankeee Member Posts: 298
    The high EPA figure for highway does appear to affect the number of unhappy drivers when they drive mostly in city stop & go. The average is much more impacted and therefore the unhappiness. Older cars were setup for overall driveability not hypermiling and extreme MPG. Tradeoff for MPG maximum on highway has to be offset somewhere and it seems to be stop & go driving from all the negative posts. One good comment was regarding low end torgue. Higher revving DI engines with smaller displacement need more revs to hit the torgue/HP curve maximum, resulting in less efficiency at the lower end of the curve. Driver applies more pedal to compensate with result being poor mileage. Makes sense.
  • m6userm6user Member Posts: 3,181
    edited April 2012
    Good post and I agree with most of your points. If the EPA test criteria was more widely known it would negate a lot of this consternation with people's new cars. For example, I knew a lot of what you mentioned but I didn't know they used 30 seconds or less for idling at traffic signals, etc. That IS pretty low.

    However, since all cars are tested under the same parameters, why is it only a few have been besieged with complaints of owners? Many of these same people had no problem meeting or beating the EPA numbers with prior cars under similar commuting. Now they buy a new car for even better mpg and they can't come close under identical or very similar driving habit/conditions. I would be wondering about it too. Nobody has been able to answer that question for me. They keep coming back with "put more air in tires" or "drive slower" or something like it. I still like my low torque argument.

    One question. I don't understand the acceleration rates you mentioned. Forgive my stupidity but 3.3/3.2 mph as measured against what. Per second or what?
  • gman4911gman4911 Member Posts: 43
    edited April 2012
    >>>Now they buy a new car for even better mpg and they can't come close under identical or very similar driving habit/conditions.

    Because real-life driving conditions are much harsher than lab conditions. The length of the EPA city/hwy tests are 11/10.3 miles. The cars are tested on a dynamometer and I assume they've programmed it to simulate level terrain. I imagine most everyone can achieve EPA numbers for that distance on level terrain without too much difficulty. But nobody drives on level terrain 100% of the time.

    >>>One question. I don't understand the acceleration rates you mentioned. Forgive my stupidity but 3.3/3.2 mph as measured against what. Per second or what?

    Yes, that would be per second.

    If you take into account all of the test parameters, very few people can drive like that 100% of the time.

    The test parameters are at EPA Detailed Test Information for anyone who's curious. Click on the 'Detailed Comparison' tab.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Bottom line is that i might just wait for the 1.6L Turbo DI drivetrain to hit the Elantra. At least if I'm not going to hit 40 MPG I'll get 200 HP while not hitting 40 MPG, right? And more importantly, I'll get gobs of low-end torque, which will keep me from having to redline the engine as much.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    At least if I'm not going to hit 40 MPG I'll get 200 HP while not hitting 40 MPG, right?

    Well, that is one way to look at it!

    I'd prefer to take my shot at the Big 4-0 with the base engine. But it would be with the GT. Which, interestingly, is NOT rated 40 mpg. More weight? Different gear ratios?
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Compact hatchbacks always seem to be 1 highway MPG off of sedans, probably have a touch more drag to them. Same applies to the Mazda3 SkyActiv and Ford Focus. I find myself wondering what the difference would be if they took the Elantra sedan as-is and just converted the glass to a hatch, to give it the same aerodynamic characteristics.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Maybe the same aerodynamics but not nearly the utility of the GT. The old GT has a swoopier profile. But not nearly the cargo capacity of the new GT. I'll take the 1 mpg penalty with the greater cargo room, thank you.
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    From Hyundai's site, numbers for the 2013 Elantra:

    Sedan max weight 2877 pounds. EPA MPG MT or AT 29/40/33.
    Coupe max weight 2877 pounds. EPA MPG MT 29/40/33 AT 28/39/32.
    GT max weight 2959 pounds. EPA MPG TBD.

    I'm surprised the sedan & coupe would weigh the same. Makes me think the coupe numbers are still preliminary estimates.

    FWIW my wife's '12 Elantra has been getting mid-20s for fuel economy. But her driving patterns are such that it comes as no surprise. Her commute is short enough (less than 3 miles) that the engine doesn't reach full operating temp. She's a bit heavier on the gas off the line than I am. And all gas available has Ethanol.

    We'll get some good highway miles this coming weekend, though, so I'm sure I'll be able to report mid-30s at least. Again E10 gas will hold MPG back some as will our probable 75MPH cruising speed.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Sedan max weight 2877 pounds. EPA MPG MT or AT 29/40/33.
    Coupe max weight 2877 pounds. EPA MPG MT 29/40/33 AT 28/39/32.
    GT max weight 2959 pounds. EPA MPG TBD.


    I wonder if the extra 80 pounds is that panoramic sunroof...
  • happydazhappydaz Member Posts: 7
    I drove the Elantra for a day and yes I did achieve very good gas mileage...if I drove it like a granny. If I drove it normal the gas mileage plummeted. But what really bothered me about the Elantra was the suspension. You feel everything. I often felt like I was hauling around a bunch of extra parts. It felt to big for the engine. My wife said it was like riding in an airplane...smooth...but with a lot of turbulence. When you hit a bump you felt it throughout the entire car and your body. At first I liked the exterior styling but it wore on me after a while. I could see it getting old fast. The interior styling was very nice with all the gadgets. Roomier than the civic. But I wouldn't be using some of the gadgets and negotiating on the Elantra was much more difficult than with the Civic EX. I basically got the Civic EX at about $500 more than the be best price I could get on a base automatic Elantra. I think the moonroof was worth that.

    The civic is tried and true dependability. It gets its MPG and I don't have to change the way I drive to get it. It is noisier but smoother. That suspension and the fact that the MPG was dependable is what sold me. No...it was being able to negotiate the price. So thanks to all those buying the Elantra, I was able to get the price I got. Hope this helps others. I almost waited for 2013s but needed a car now and figured negotiating on the new 2013 would be more difficult.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,142
    If you recently traded in a gas guzzler for a more fuel-efficient new vehicle, a reporter wants to talk with you. Please email [email protected] no later than Friday, April 13, 2012 with your daytime contact info and the makes and models of the vehicles.

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Need help navigating? [email protected] - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • happydazhappydaz Member Posts: 7
    roll up windows and close doors. Stand outside Elantra with music on. Make sure the Fading is even so you are using back speakers also. It is loud as if they didn't put any sound insulation in the panels or just thin panels. It was so loud it seemed abnormal. Now the Civic is also a tin can. Open the trunk. Feels like it might fall off. Elantra...I didn't like the fact there is no spare. The sales guy told me....hey, you need to call a tow truck anyway if you get a flat. Really. That was dumb. Civic ... radio reception is much better. Don't know why. In Elantra the salesperson insisted on demoing the phone features. He took his phone and loaded his phone numbers from it to the car. Then verbally instructed car to call a number. The car rejected the command three times before I told him to put a sock in it. If I drove normal in the Elantra around town I got 23 mpg. But they say the onboard mpg reading is high by about two miles. So that would really be 21 mpg. Now, I honestly don't know what I was getting. But if I drove like a granny, I got about 35 city. That was great. Seemed like a huge threshold between driving very conservative and driving normal. That bothered me. I do like the way the Elantra can seem to roll forever without applying the pedal. It is almost like skating.
  • happydazhappydaz Member Posts: 7
    I would recommend renting the three cars at top of your list. This gives you a chance to spend time alone with it. No one watching you.

    Search online to find out what others paid and when they bought. Try to go with entries that give the details. Try to determine from this, a price that you definitely should get. And then one you want to shoot for. You are negotiating an OTD price. Out The Door. That way they cannot fill in a bunch of fake charges on you. You have to Demand that the OTD price includes the price of the car including what happens in the finance office. You need to know all the fees that the finance guy may try to spring on you. You have to be able to compare apples to apples.

    Now get prequalified by a bank or credit union and get prequaled by the car manufacturer.

    Now send an email to all dealers in the area where you would be willing to go. Specify you are ready to buy and already prequalified with the manufacturer. Specify the exact car you want and ask for the OTD price. Make sure you exactly specify the car, the transmission and all.

    Now get the best price and send that out to all the others. Play them against one another until you get the best price.

    Now you know who you will buy from. Tell them to send you the VIN Number and a fax of the window sticker. Look over this information to make sure all is right. Ask for the Mileage on the car. It should be very very low.

    Now that you are ready to go get it....tell them when and make sure they understand if you are financing and make sure you go over the OTD price again.

    Now call the sales manager and go over the deal again.

    Now go pick up your car. Pay attention to how the title work will be handled. They may try to get you for more money on title. That is why the OTD price is the Total...After visit to financing...OTD Price. Tell them you don't want any extended warranty. That makes the process easier. You can always buy that after the fact.

    OK go get your car. Now if anything out of the ordinary comes up...anything...simply abort. Tell them you need time to look into that and leave the dealership. Gather info. you need and allow yourself time to collect your thoughts. Then go back and finish up. This is very important because they will try complicated [non-permissible content removed] on you that they deal with all the time but which you may need more time to get your mind around. If they try to force you to proceed without leaving then tell them to back off or the deal is over. You have to stay in complete control all the time.

    Best of luck
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    I do like the way the Elantra can seem to roll forever without applying the pedal. It is almost like skating.

    I think you have hit on the best way to get high FE on any non-hybrid car: keep your foot off the accelerator as much as possible. Works for me anyway. If the Elantra can "roll forever" without touching the pedal, that bodes well for folks who know how to keep a light touch on the gas. As you said, you got 35 city when driving like the proverbial Granny--or 20% better than the EPA number. So maybe by just driving like an Auntie, one could hit the EPA numbers. ;)
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,142
    I think most of our members are already familiar with the basic research that one should do prior to buying a car.

    I would skip a WHOLE lot of the middle part of your suggestion - you shouldn't have to spend all of that time and go through hassle playing dealers against each other IF you have already done the research and know what deal is doable, with some flexibility. I've never had as painful an experience as the prolonged ordeal you describe!

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Need help navigating? [email protected] - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • ronnomadronnomad Member Posts: 11
    I'm just replying to the last message on this forum but not to the specifics of that message.

    We bought our 2012 Elantra Limited back in June. To date, with 8,125 miles (2,830 so far this year) we have a total average of 29.76MPG. 50-75% of the miles are HWY and the 'best' MPG we have seen is 33.5 with all HWY driving. To get this vehicle we got rid of a 1998 Corolla with 230,000 miles that was still averaging over 30MPG in regular (read daily) driving. Any major driving was done in a 2001 VW Jetta (4cyl Turbo w/5 speed manual). The VW has just under 130,000 miles (this year 3,704 miles - avg MPG this year 28.3). As I have noted in previous posts, at speed, the VW is about 1,000RPM HIGHER than the Elantra. Also, I tend to be more aggressive in the VW. So, regardless of what is being said about fuel type, foot pressure, etc., it makes no sense that a brand new car with a 6 speed automatic is not getting better (HWY) MPG and something closer to what is being advertised.
    BTW, the reason we got rid of the Corolla was that "I" thought the car was under powered and under braked. And, the reason we did not go fora new Corolla was that I thought the 6 speed transmission in the Elantra would be superior to the 4 speed in the Corolla.
    As an FYI, on a 1,500 mile trip (with 3 people in the car and a full trunk) the VW averaged 30.68MPG. The EPA figures for that year's model are 22 city, 24 avg, 28 HWY.
    Oh, and to ask a question. More than one post has alluded to the instantaneous MPG meter. Where is that? I can only see the Average MPG meter.
  • chickraechickrae Member Posts: 44
    Right I don't think all that research is necessary. I emailed 3 different dealerships. Same car...one was quite high and one was low (hyundai Elantra) The third dealership was a different brand of car altogether (mazda 3 touring skyactiv)I didn't play the dealers against each other, however on my trade in I did. I needed to get a certain amount for my trade in or all deals off and I was selling the car myself before buying the new car. I found one that would give me what I wanted and it happened to be the Mazda dealer and I liked the car better anyways. I have heard too many negatives about the Elantra. And like someone else said...the design is very attractive but I think I would tire of it. My buying experience was actually great and stress free at the dealership.
  • fowler3fowler3 Member Posts: 1,919
    chickrae said: And like someone else said...the design is very attractive but I think I would tire of it.

    I thought the same way about the Elantra. In fact, on the street it doesn't look as interesting, the body design doesn't stand out in a crowd at traffic lights. Both Hyundai and Kia haver a problem with
    paint colors—nothing special! Very ordinary hides the cars. Color choices should highlight the new designs without being so close to other brands.
Sign In or Register to comment.