Howdy, Stranger!

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





2012 Kia Rio5: Real Time Fuel Economy (MPG).

1234579

Comments

  • btatrbtatr Posts: 75
    I was driving home earlier this afternoon on a bright, sunny day. Suddenly the skies became very dark and overcast so I decided to play around and switched to AUTO Mode for the lights. I drove approximately 3 miles and the lights never came on. I pulled into a parking space where it was very dark, exited the vehicle and double checked, still no lights.

    The only lights which came on were the dashboard lights for the speedometer and tachometer.

    This is not a complaint because I actually prefer manual control with the flick of a switch on the steering wheel lever. So I must report with my American Model SX, the so called DRLs do not work as advertised.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,692
    DRLs don't work like that. They are called "DAYTIME running lights" for a reason. On cars so equipped, they are on ALL THE TIME when the car is running. An example of that is my wife's 2013 Sonata, which has DRLs. Start the car, leave the headlight switch in the OFF position, and the DRLs are shining.

    The "Auto" switch, which is on the Sonata also, controls the regular headlights, and turns them on/off as lighting dictates. So when the Sonata is in our garage, dark with no windows, and I start the car with the "Auto" switch engaged, the headlights come on. Back out into daylight, and the headlights go off. I find however that they don't come on every time I'd like them on, e.g. it's pretty cloudy but they still don't come on even though I'd prefer to have the lights on.

    If your Rio's headlights didn't come on in a very dark parking space with "Auto" headlights engaged, and you left the engine running when you got out to check them, you should have that checked by the dealer because they don't seem to be operating correctly.
  • btatrbtatr Posts: 75
    Backy I completely agree with you. In a previous message, I said my SX does not have DRLs and one of our forum members derived some type of pleasure by stating I was incorrect.

    I in turn checked the owner's manual and found no references to DRLs so I knew I was right. However, I did learn that the Auto switch is the closest thing to a DRL on my SX. But yes you are correct, that is not the same thing as a DRL, my little story was nothing more than a simple experiment.

    The fact that the Auto Switch apparently doesn't work properly on my car is a non issue because I never use that feature. As stated above, I only did it this time as a very basic learning experience.

    I definitely prefer manual control of my lights
    . And believe me, it couldn't be any easier. All I have to do is is turn a switch on a lever attached to the steering wheel a fraction of an inch. That takes virtually no effort whatsoever.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,692
    Still, I'd have it checked while the car is still under warranty if I were you. The next owner might like automatic lights.
  • phill1phill1 Posts: 315
    edited July 2013
    btatr; As much as I have enjoyed arguing and disputing the difference in our opinions on the Kia Rio5 which we both own, yours an SX and mine a lowly LX with the optional Power Package of PW and PL, I must admit that I recently found out that U.S. Spec Kia Rio and Rio5`s in SX Trim "Do Not" come equipped with DRL`s or Daytime Running Lights! It appears that when the Car Magazines got to drive the first 2012 U.S. Spec Rio5`s, they in fact (Did) have the DRL`s. They were however, early production Models. Kia decided for some unknown reason to make the LED`s on U.S. Spec Models simply Parking/Accent Lights, (instead) of utilizing them as they are used, ever where else in the World this Vehicle is sold. Kia has made the DRLs available as part of a Package on its U.S. Spec 2014 Forte. I was correct however, the U.S. Spec. 2012 Kia Sportage and 2013 Kia Sportage in "SX" Trim, which has the identical LED Lighting as the Kia Rio, on those Vehicles, they are Daytime Running Lights, not simply Parking/Accent Lights which must be activated manually. "Mea Culpa" I have no problem admitting to a mistake. Like I have stated often, one is always entitled to their own (opinion) not their own (facts). Your Kia Rio5 SX obviously does (not) have DRL`s. No need to check with your Kia Dealership, sorry.
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,516
    ...but let's send the DRL commentary where it belongs: Kia Rio Electrical issues

    Keep the focus here on MPG - thanks!
    KCRam - Pickups/Wagons/Vans+Minivans Host
  • btatrbtatr Posts: 75
    edited July 2013
    OK, let's get back to mpg and maybe someone can help with a mystery?

    I lived in a mid-Atlantic state in the foothills of the Smoky Mountains and made 2 long, round trip drives to south Florida. It seemed pretty logical to me that once I got to FL my fuel economy would go up because the state is flat as a board, no more hills. Well guess what, that didn't happen as fuel economy actually went down.

    In the Carolinas I was getting between 37-38 mpg on the Interstate in a vehicle packed with luggage and household items. However, when I reached southern GA and entered FL my fuel economy consistently went to down to about 36-36.5 mpg. And it stayed that way for the next 400 miles. Admittedly, there was a lot of road construction on I-95 but there were also long stretches where I hardly stopped. And I also realize we're not talking about a huge drop but it certainly is significant, especially since I thought mpg would rise.

    Let's eliminate a problem with the car as the cause because when I drove home, as I left FL and got further north, my fuel economy went back up to the aforementioned numbers. And this wasn't a one time event because on my 2nd round trip two weeks later, again with a full car, the same thing happened with fuel economy.

    Maybe the road surfaces are different on FL highway? Maybe the hot weather and hot road surfaces combined reduce mpg? I don't know, do any forum members have a logical explanation?
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,692
    edited July 2013
    I think you hit it on the nose:

    Admittedly, there was a lot of road construction on I-95...

    Some people have no idea what effect even a few slowdowns for traffic can have on highway FE. I've seen that myself on highway trips with different cars. One thing you should do is check your average speed before entering FL, then check it again leaving FL. I'll bet you'll see a significant drop.

    Another factor could be the hotter weather in FL, if you tend to run your AC more there than in the Carolinas. Also, when you fill up at home, do you buy oxygenated gas or pure gas? If you buy pure gas at home then fill up with oxygenated gas in FL, that will affect FE negatively also.

    And when you reach your destination in FL, do you do any driving off the freeway, or just turn around and head back home? ;) I'll bet you drive around town for awhile... and that will cut into your average.

    BTW... a drop from 37 to 36 mpg is a 2.7% reduction. Not really that big, IMO. And easily explained by circumstances such as I've described.
  • btatrbtatr Posts: 75
    edited July 2013
    * Same type of gas
    * It's hot in the Carolinas so the A/C is always on
    * In town stop and go driving mpg is down in FL. On the other hand, if you miss a green light in FL, you wind up sitting at an intersection for 3-4 minutes (at least it feels that way). In the Carolinas I rarely have to wait more than one minute at a red light.

    Finally, I realize it's not a huge drop in mpg but the reason I started this topic is I expected fuel economy to go up, not down in FL, because the roads are flat.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,692
    On the other hand, if you miss a green light in FL, you wind up sitting at an intersection for 3-4 minutes (at least it feels that way). In the Carolinas I rarely have to wait more than one minute at a red light.

    That alone could easily explain a 2.7% drop in FE.

    As for flat roads... I find FE tends to even out pretty much on hills, if you're going downhill as much as uphill. But here's something to consider: What's your starting elevation, and what's the elevation in FL? In general, driving to FL, I'll bet you are going downhill more than uphill. So that should aid FE driving to FL. But you also said you see your FE increase after you leave FL. So that leads me to the construction zones and longer waits at lights in FL as the main culprits.
  • btatrbtatr Posts: 75
    ELEVATION! Hmmmmmmmmmm....., you may have hit on something.

    I was thinking they possibly use a different type of gasoline in FL, maybe a slightly different type of road surface, and finally the intense heat coming off the roadway as the possible culprits. I'm not ruling any of them out, but you came up with something brand new and that's why I posted this question.

    Maybe the lower elevation of FL impacts fuel economy in a negative manner?


    It sounds just as plausible as the other possibilities mentioned above.
  • phill1phill1 Posts: 315
    edited July 2013
    Realizing full well that in this Blog, I am "persona non grata" for mentioning (anything) negative about about the 2012/2013 Kia Rio and its Fuel Economy, since (I) do live in South FL and have been residing here for the past 15 years I can assure you, its the Vehicle "not" Florida, the Roads, nor the intense heat. I just made a trip across the State this past weekend from FT Lauderdale to Naples on I 75, aka, Alligator Alley. It is almost 100 miles of straight, perfectly flat highway. My 2012 Kia Rio got barely 31 mpg highway with (zero) city driving, no road construction. I use regular octane gasoline that contains up to 10% ethanol which is basically the only gasoline to be find down here regardless of what grade of gasoline you use. I will admit, I was averaging almost 80 mph, it was raining hard, and the A/C was engaged. "My" Kia Rio has never, I repeat, never exceeded 33 mpg highway ever, at lower speeds, clear sky, winter or summer, etc. If my Rio ever reached 36 mpg or above, I`d be thrilled. The Fuel Economy you experienced for this particular Car is excellent and there is no need for complaint IMO. By the way, I was by myself with almost no luggage and only the Donut Spare Emergency Tire and Jack Assembly Kit which I replaced the Toy Air Compressor and Can of Tire Sealant Goo that came with the Vehicle. Maybe all that extra weight explains the miserable Fuel Economy I experience in both city & highway, you think?
  • btatrbtatr Posts: 75
    edited July 2013
    Phil1 completely missed the point of my post. I'm not talking about all KIA RIOs, only my car, a 2012 RIO SX. The very same vehicle in the Carolinas consistently got better mileage then it did in FL which surprised me big time. The only variable in this equation was the location.

    As an aside, during the aforementioned FL trips, because I spent so much time on the Interstate, I decided to experiment with going slower. I normally travel between 70-75 mph on the Interstate, occasionaly going up to 80 mph without realizing it.

    However, when I made a conscious effort to slow down to the speed limit, 65 mph, I noticed fuel economy improved approximately 1 to 1.5 mpg. Unfortunately I couldn't maintain that slower speed for very long .
  • phill1phill1 Posts: 315
    I`m sorry, I simply (wrongly) assumed the (Vehicle) in question that you drove to Florida was a 2012 Kia Rio. My misunderstanding. If another Make or Model car was driven, you absolutely correct, it makes no difference whatsoever. If it was a 2012 Kia Rio, the fact that it was (yours) not mine, the point is? A reasonable person would assume that similar Vehicles would produce similar results under similar conditions, correct? You know....Apples with Apples comparisons? Again, I apologize for once again assuming.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,692
    Maybe the lower elevation of FL impacts fuel economy in a negative manner?

    I doubt it, unless it has something to do with slightly denser air at a lower elevation.

    But that was not my point. My point was, if you start off at, say, 1000 feet, and get to FL and the elevation is 50 feet, you've been going downhill (on average) during that trip.

    Then there's the construction zones, and waiting more at traffic lights. All those little things combined are enough IMO to cause a 2.7% drop in FE.

    The real solution to your dilemma is: stay the heck out of FL!!! :)
  • btatrbtatr Posts: 75
    edited July 2013
    Backy, I realized that wasn't your point because you did your usual excellent job of explaining yourself. I was merely trying to say that raising the issue of elevation made wonder if that had any impact on mileage. I still think it's as valid as any of the other possibilities mentioned in both of our posts.

    You had me LOL with that dilemma comment about FL.
  • phill1phill1 Posts: 315
    I whole heartedly agree as well. Another "excellent" explanation! Most Floridians feel the same way, believe it or not, LOL. We always show (complainers) the easiest to follow directions to reach either I 95 or I 75 North! Thanks for helping keep Florida without a State Income Tax.
  • skeptic101skeptic101 Posts: 29
    I believe mpg differences are attributable to wind direction and ethanol content. The best mpg I ever achieved was 42 mpg where I filled up at a station out in the boonies 50 miles north of Tampa and refueled in Chattanooga. I was being chased by a hurricane so I had a tail wind and very dense air. No A/C. The same trip south just a few days prior resulted in 38 mpg, filling up in Chattanooga. Same weight both ways, two people with luggage. Because of air quality problems Chattanooga's gas is 10% ethanol. I doubt there is any requirement in the boonies of central FL. All mileage was calculated using my GPS, not the car's trip computer. :)
  • csandstecsandste Posts: 1,866
    edited July 2013
    Average 29.67 mpg
    Worst 21.29 mpg
    Best 40.79 mpg

    I switched Android phones in September, so these averages are for 10 months. Mileage entered under previous phone was roughly the same, although this represents the best and worst tanks. Lots of hot weather running. MPG gauge about three mpg high.
  • phill1phill1 Posts: 315
    Just curious of what the excellent explanation would be to why the Gasoline requirement in the "Boonies" of Central Florida would be less restrictive to those along the coastline. The "I 4" corridor near Orlando has some of the worst traffic and air pollution on the entire peninsula. At least along the Ocean or Gulf, there is usually a sea breeze and air movement. Its because of that, the Federal Government eliminated the need for annual pollution testing on automobiles here. The only place in FL I have found pure non-ethanol Gasoline is a few locations along Route 1 in Monroe County in the Florida Keys. Its mostly to supply gasoline for folks trailering their boats that have Outboard Motors that many still require non-ethanol gas.
  • btatrbtatr Posts: 75
    csandst gets
    Average 29.67 mpg
    Worst 21.29 mpg
    Best 40.79 mpg

    I have a 2012 SX with approximately 15,000 miles and my results are similar but not identical.

    Average: 30 mpg
    Worst: 22.3 mpg
    Best: 39.1 mpg


    I usually get around 24-25 mpg during strictly stop and go traffic but that changes with heavy traffic and/or frequent stops for red lights.

    I usually get between 37-38 mph on strictly highway (no stop and go at all). I never reached the magical number of 40 mpg. I thought that would happen on my two FL trips but my mileage actually went down in FL which was a major surprise.

    And I used to average close to 31 mpg but now I'm down to about 30 mpg in combined driving. I think that number dropped because I'm spending more time at red lights.
  • phill1phill1 Posts: 315
    I bet you can`t believe it, but guess what? After further review of those remarkable MPG numbers of the smallest Vehicle Kia offers in the North American market I have "no comment". I am aware that Fuel Economy is but a very small factor for a rational person to consider when purchasing a Sub Compact - B Segment car. Surprised? Who says you can`t teach an old Dog new tricks. Cheers!
  • skeptic101skeptic101 Posts: 29
    Oops, my bad. Florida was one of a few states that had an E10 requirement for all gas sold from regular stations at the time I was there. Apparently I refueled with E10 in both places. Thinking about it more, besides wind direction another difference would have been the pumps at the different gas stations. The auto shutoff at the Chattanooga station could have been more sensitive than the one in Florida. That would still provide a 40 mpg average for the round trip. Not bad!

    BTW, I read that Florida's E10 requirement was repealed last month.
  • csandstecsandste Posts: 1,866
    Almost all of my mileage is E10, either St. Louis or trips to Iowa and South Dakota.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,692
    Just did my first tank of all in-town driving. For me, "in town" includes urban freeways (sometimes congested, speed limits 60-65), city streets (lots of stoplights/signs), and suburban streets (fewer stoplights/signs). AC was on about half the time; this tank covered our hottest week of the year so far, with temps reaching the mid-90s. I put in 9.44 gallons after 323 miles, for 34.2 mpg. (Computer said 35.1, for an error of just under 3%. How much of that is due to different pump etc. is hard to know.) Unfortunately, the average mph is useless as it resets when I start the car. But I know most trips were less than 7 miles, with a handful between 12-20 miles.

    I'm happy with 34.2 mpg in that kind of driving; it's about 10% better than my traded 2010 Sentra with CVT, and only 2 hp less in the Rio. The Rio is a peppier car, more fun to drive than the Sentra which had a slushy CVT and slushy steering. Will be interesting to see if mpg improves with more miles; just under 800 on the car now.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    That's pretty respectable mileage for the type of driving you described. I suspect it is a stick?

    I was very impressed with the seat comfort of a 3 or 4 dr hatch I sat in last month. It was one trim level up from base base. (had air, keyless entry and cruise I think, my two must haves)
    Cdn car so might be optioned differently here..

    For a small car it would be one of the ones on my short list..opinion reserved tho until after I drove it of course. Will get the 6 sp auto, which ends an era for me.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,692
    This is the 6AT. The LX doesn't come with a stick if you want things like power windows... which I do. But it's a nice AT, for what they are... smooth and responsive. Revs pretty low for a small engine, too... just over 2000 RPM @ 60 mph. So it's a pretty quiet car on the highway. I wanted a stick in my next car, but hard to find one. And I was in some heavy traffic the other day and thought, "I'm glad I don't have a stick!"
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    Good to know about the quiet on highway. I've found engine noise to never really be an issue as much as road noise, then wind. How is the Rio in that regard?

    I'm one of the rare people that actually would prefer a crank window, but that said, the handle and gear ratio has to have some thought put into it. I was sitting in a crank window Yaris last winter and the handle felt like it would break off in my hand. I'm sure the flexibility had something to do with crash design, but it sure didn't inspire much longevity confidence.

    I commend Kia for not going the CVT route. The car wouldn't be in my sights if that was the only type of auto it had.

    What other cars did you rule out during your search process?
  • phill1phill1 Posts: 315
    Are we describing a U.S. Spec Kia Rio LX or a Canadian Kia Rio LX? In the U.S. until recently, it was the only Model Kia Rio which the Manual Transmission was an option. This past year a (very) limited amount of Kia Rio5 SX`s were imported to the U.S. to meet the demands of those who wanted the 6 Speed Manual Transmission. Although its true, the Canadian Kia Rio and Rio5 have different Trim Options and Standard equipment compared to the U.S. Spec counterparts, those who desire Power Windows, Power Door Locks, and Power Mirrors, can obtain them in a U.S. Spec LX Model. Its offered as a "Power Package" and adds about $1000 to the MSRP. I think I should know since my 2012 Kia Rio5 "LX" has those added features. The main difference between the U.S. Spec LX and EX other then the optional (Power Package) option is the Radio`s are identical but lack both the "bluetooth" and Tweeter Speakers mounted on the A-pillar, the Cruise Control, and the highly desirable Sliding Armrest with Storage Container and supposedly an upgraded Fabric Trim for the seats. I actually think that the LX Fabric is superior in looks to what is used in the EX and SX.
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    wouldn't it be so nice and helpful if there was provision to display your location and what you are driving that would show on each posting and then you wouldn't have to make all the guess work or get confused because of people posting from different countries and driving different models.
    Other automotive sites have this feature and makes it so much easier to answer questions and carrying on conversations. Saves a lot of repeat questions in trying to clarify things too. Come on Edmunds get up to date!
Sign In or Register to comment.