Howdy, Stranger!

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





Toyota Camry Real World MPG

1232426282958

Comments

  • mcdawggmcdawgg Posts: 1,666
    Filled up today due to the likely price increase for the holiday weekend. 29.47 mpg, (294.1 miles, 9.98 gallons). I expected it to be down from my normal commute average, because I got stuck in a traffic jam due to an accident (14 minutes to go 1.5 miles) and I got sent on a Taco Bell run for lunch (10 minutes to go 100 ft.).

    If you are keeping track, this is my third fill-up that I reported the details, and the mpg has been very consistent (29.47, 30.51, 31.17).

    I know someone at work who has an 07 SE automatic - I'll ask about her mpg.
  • dremdrem Posts: 24
    Just filled up after a road trip. Four adults, one overnight cold start, 85% highway with cruise at 72mph. 443 miles using 13.2 gallons = 33.6mpg. 2004 4cyl auto.

    Doriep, 30+ mpg should be absolutely expected on the road. I don't drive 80mph, but I get (on both the 1999 and 2004 4cyl autos) 40mpg at 65 cruise and 36mpg at 72mph cruise. I would suspect another 13% loss or ~31.3 mpg if I drove at 80 mph cruise over 72mph...

    Tire type, tire pressure, wheel alignment, oxygen sensor, and especially ethanol content of the gasoline can all effect mileage. But with only 20-22 on the highway under cruise control, something is definitely different with the engine/car/fuel setup. Your car cannot possibly be requiring 35% more energy to roll down the highway than mine.

    Drem
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,407
    aha! That is the problem. Three miles from workk means the engine is never warm and is proably getting about 10 mpg. That will bring down the average real fast.
  • lmacmillmacmil Posts: 1,756
    Try a highway trip at 70 mph and see what happens. That should get you another 5 mpg. Still low for a 4 cyl though.
  • phd86phd86 Posts: 110
    As I've said (and several others):

    The 2007 is not as efficient as the prior style (2002-2006), which wasn't anything to write home about either. But it's a bigger boat, and a more powerful engine.

    I think you could probably pull 24-25 mpg or even a little bit more if you slowed down to 65, turned off the A/C, pumped the tires to 40 psi, and did pancake flat driving like me in Sacramento. The other issue you are having is that you are tracking every single tankful and odometer reading like a hawk, possibly even doing running averages and so forth. Most of the time, you'll see people posting their best mileage on one tank. They also have this habit of running it some short distance, like 200-400 miles, and then refilling up to the first click. Then saying, "look at me - I got 200 miles on 5 gallons! I get 40 mpg!" Problem is, they actually used 8 gallons, and got 25 mpg. Don't believe or disbelieve me, just try it some time. The 5 gallons is what they put into the car. After the first click, see how much gas you can put in the tank. For some reason, the gas tank neck on the recent camry backs up and causes premature shutoff with a whole lot of room left in the tank. 3 gallons of empty space is not "topping off".

    Just think about it. If this car (and by "this" I mean an AT, not MT) really got 35 mpg, wouldn't you think someone would be able to run it 600+ miles on a tankful? (that would be 17.1 gallons, with plenty of gas left over). Yet nobody ever has come close - not even as an extreme outlier. Not 35 mpg (630 miles), not 32 mpg (600 miles), not 30 mpg (555 miles). So it would unreasonable to expect 30+ mpg under normal circumstances as an average.

    There's also some notion (see earlier post/response to samian) out there that there is a "dead pool" in the bottom of a gas tank that you can't use the last bit of gas. Nope. You can use all the gas in a gas tank. And when its empty, there is no gas in it. I would bet you that an 18.5 gallon tank, when empty - does indeed hold 18.5 gallons of gas (I tested this on my older camry, albeit unintentionally).

    The other thing misleading about the camry is the gas gage reading. I too can pull 200 miles in the first 1/4 of the tank, using the gas gage. But do you think I used a 1/4 of 18.5 gallons? Not. The first 1/4 of the tank, on the gas gage, is something like 8 gallons. I swear to you, I have put in 11+ gallons into this car with the gas gage at half full. The first time it happened, it made me look under the car for leaks (there were none), but its just the gas gage.

    Oh, by the way, I made a slight error in my last report, it was 447 miles for 17.0 gallons. That's 26.3 mpg. It is a spot measure. It is what it is.

    My car is also capable of getting the mileage stated. I stated that it gets 26-28 mpg on pure freeway, and that's what it gets.
  • mcdawggmcdawgg Posts: 1,666
    "The 2007 is not as efficient as the prior style (2002-2006), which wasn't anything to write home about either. But it's a bigger boat, and a more powerful engine."

    Guess what, it is NOT a more powerful engine. The I4 in the '07-08 is the same engine as was used in the 2002-2006. The weight may be slightly more for the 07-08, but not by much, because the length is the same, but the width is up one inch. If I have time, I will look up the weights and the coefficient of drags.

    I will continue to monitor every tank, and fill up at the same pump, with about the same commute. I have now reported 3 in a row - (29.47, 30.51, 31.17). Very consistent, and even if there were "3 gallons of empty space", it would be the same for every fill up, so it would not matter, since I use the same pump and quit pumping after the automatic shut-off.

    Just a note on MPG variability: my Corolla will get about 37mpg on my commute, but when my wife drives it on her commute, it gets only about 25mpg. The difference? Lots of short trips (4 miles or less).

    Someone else care to comment about the alleged "3 gallons of empty space"?

    Happy Thanksgiving!
  • "I am incredibly steamed at my Toyota. I own a 2007 4cyl automatic SE. On a pure highway trip, with my kids in the back, not exceeding 80 mph I got 22 mpg. And that is the best i have ever gotten."

    I'd be incredibly steamed as well. I get 26mpg around town.
  • Just think about it. If this car (and by "this" I mean an AT, not MT) really got 35 mpg, wouldn't you think someone would be able to run it 600+ miles on a tankful? (that would be 17.1 gallons, with plenty of gas left over). Yet nobody ever has come close - not even as an extreme outlier. Not 35 mpg (630 miles), not 32 mpg (600 miles), not 30 mpg (555 miles). So it would unreasonable to expect 30+ mpg under normal circumstances as an average.

    PhD, you keep saying stuff like this and it simply isn't true. My 05 AT with the same engine as my 07 (2AZ-FE) got nearly identical mileage on trips. At high speeds loaded and A/C I could get 33 easy, and at slow eastern speeds I could crack 35, SAME AS ON MY 5SP MANUAL 07. I think if I ever drove the 07 slowly (60-65) for a tank of gas, the Manual would beat the Auto, but that is NOT what is causing the difference between my documented 35+ highway trips and your admittedly poor results.

    Your experience with AT's in Camrys simply isn't typical, and there are lots of others around who know this, and know it WITHOUT trying to run the tank dry in the middle of nowhere.
  • igrigr Posts: 17
    It looks to me that one of the major "arguments" here is about how much gas is actually pumped into the tank. Most of the people seem to be filling tank "full", driving, then taking odometer reading and dividing it by tank capacity.
    I may not understand something, but for calculation to be accurate you have to divide mileage by actual gallons used, not tank total capacity. Why not to take actual reading from the pump after fill-up, write it down together with odometer reading and do your math next time you fill you tank again. That's what I personally do. The only difference - I do not wait till tank is "empty" (this condition is not accurate enough for me), I always do my math when fuel gauge indicator reaches exactly at 1/4 mark. If I have to fill gas before I reach 1/4, I just keep adding amount of fuel to my last record and wait till my indicator reaches 1/4 mark.
    So far my mpg for 2004 Camry 4 Cyl. AT, 31 PSI, Mineral Engine Oil are much closer to PHD86 numbers than to people claiming more than 30 MPG on highway. My best highway reading so far is 29 mpg. Average is 28 mpg.
    The other good thing when discussing mpg for city would be to post the population of the city. It gives better understanding how heavy traffic might be and may explain the difference between city mpg for the same cars, driven in different traffic conditions.
    I live in Toronto, about 2.5 million people and my best summer city was 22 mpg so far. My average is about 20-21 mpg.
  • "It looks to me that one of the major "arguments" here is about how much gas is actually pumped into the tank."

    IGR, I don't think your concept is one of the major arguments. I believe PhD, and you, when you both say that your cars get crappier than expected results. Lets face it, calculating fuel mileage is easy, and as many people CAN'T be doing it wrong as get bad results for fuel mileage. It would mean that a large minority of the Camry owning community are incompetent when dividing one number by another, and with calculators, I just can't believe thats the reason for the wide variations, between models, where certain drivers always get worse results, and others always get better results.

    There has to be something else going on here, driving habits, quality of gasoline, mechanical, SOMETHING which explains the difference.

    I have come to EXPECT my Camrys to get 30+, period, hands down, no trouble, loaded and moving fast, V6 or I4, auto or stick. If I got the mileage you and PhD get I would be steamed and throwing banana's at my dealership when they couldn't find something wrong with my car.

    I think its unfortunate we can't get this figured out....its a decent car, and it really should get, at the LEAST, the highway mileage as stated on the sticker for EVERYONE. I mean really, 65mph roadtrips as long as you aren't climbing a huge mountain somewhere shouldn't by themselves have enough variation to cause these differences.
  • The worst highway fuel mileage I have ever gotten on my 2007 Camry LE I4 AT is 34MPG. That's driving between 65 to 75 on the interstates, with an occasional blip to 80 around Chicago. City mileage is typically around 23 winter to 26 summer.
  • igrigr Posts: 17
    That was exactly my point, everybody is using calculator dividing mileage by tank capacity, but the tank capacity might be different between cars of the same model and year. Fuel gauge indicator is another factor. I heard from many people(not only Toyota) that it reports different gas amount in the tank on the cars of the same year and model filled with the same amount of gas.
    Let's imaging gas consumption is really the same for both my and your vehicle and is 35 mpg. We both filled full tanks(18.5 gallons) and drove on the same highway until fuel gauge indicator reports Empty. Your fuel gauge reports Empty, when your tank has left 0.5 gallon of gas left, mine reports Empty when there is 1.5 gallon left. Therefore you drove (18.5 - 0.5) * 35 = 630 miles, I drove only (18.5 - 1.5) * 35 = 595 miles. Then we both do our math. You take 630 and divide it by 18.5=34.1, I divide 595 by 18.5=32.2. Here we gave 1.9 mpg difference. Let's imaging that my pump shut off 1 gallon earlier than yours during initial fill-up, than my fuel gauge would report Empty when I drove only (18.5 - 1.5 - 1) * 35 = 560 miles and my mpg would be 560/18.5=30.3 mpg only. Here we have 3.8 mpg difference. ;)
    I'm not trying to say what mpg vehicle should produce, I'm saying that using MAXIMUM tank capacity is too inaccurate for comparing vehicles mpg. In my opinion, pump counter gives accurate amount of gas filled and should be used in calculations.
  • I doubt ANYONE here is using tank capacity to calculate MPG. From all the reports on this forum, it seems almost everyone is doing it correctly - miles driven since last fill-up divided by number of gallons to fill up. By using tank capacity, you will have people reporting 50-60-70 MPG.

    Very few folks report partial MPG from the trip computer for certain legs of a trip. This is innacurate, but, again, these reports are few and far between.
  • dremdrem Posts: 24
    igr,

    No-one is dividing by tank capacity as far as I can see on this board. We start with a full tank, drive x miles, fill-up again and divide miles driven by gallons used. Its simple.

    There is some difference in defining what a fill-up is. For me, I use the same pump and fill speed for 98% of all fillups. I can't imagine being more than a tenth of a gallon or two off in any fillup when I stop at the first auto shut off. But just in case that is an issue I often fill up the gas to the top of the filler tube before and after a long trip just to be sure all is constant. In any case my mileage on the road is always 35+ mpg for 100% road cruising. It is my experience that I can fill about 1.6 gallons more past the first stop. Everyone needs to account for that if/when refilling for mileage calculation purposes.

    I know...filling up to the top of the filler tube may not be good for controlling evaporative emissions for the first hour of driving, but the overall effect on that tank of gas is minimal.

    Drem
  • phd86phd86 Posts: 110
    "The worst highway fuel mileage I have ever gotten on my 2007 Camry LE I4 AT is 34MPG. That's driving between 65 to 75 on the interstates, with an occasional blip to 80 around Chicago. City mileage is typically around 23 winter to 26 summer"

    This is a good example of the type of message language which I believe leads some people to purchase this car and be disappointed. To the contrary, my opinion is that there is no 2007 AT Camry in existence that has ever achieved 34 MPG at any time, no less never get less than 34 mpg as the "worst" highway fuel mileage. I've test driven this car and it does not get 25 mpg on the freeway. I might believe 26, but not 34.

    If you are thinking about getting the car - rent one and drive a full tank.
  • phd86phd86 Posts: 110
    PHD SAYS: Just think about it. If this car (and by "this" I mean an AT, not MT) really got 35 mpg, wouldn't you think someone would be able to run it 600+ miles on a tankful? (that would be 17.1 gallons, with plenty of gas left over). Yet nobody ever has come close - not even as an extreme outlier. Not 35 mpg (630 miles), not 32 mpg (600 miles), not 30 mpg (555 miles). So it would unreasonable to expect 30+ mpg under normal circumstances as an average.

    TROY SAYS: "PhD, you keep saying stuff like this and it simply isn't true. "

    "At high speeds loaded and A/C I could get 33 easy, and at slow eastern speeds I could crack 35"

    PHD's RESPONSE: By "could get", I surmise that you don't. And there aren't a bunch of posts on 600+ mile ranges, are there? I stand by my earlier post.
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    It's entirely possible I am misunderstanding some of the points that some are trying make, but the bottom line is that figuring miles-per-gallon is not that hard.

    You fill up the car. You drive until it's time to fill up again. You note the miles driven since the last time you filled up and you note the gallons it took to fill the tank this time. You divide the miles driven since the last tank by the gallons it took to fill the tank this time and there you have it - Miles driven Per Gallon used.

    Tank capacity and however many miles one may or may not get from a "full" tank have nothing to do with actual MPG.

    There are many subtleties that can be applied to the basic formula I'm referencing (being sure you always fill from the same pump, use the automatic shut-off, don't top off, average over a number of tanks not just one, don't expect peak MPG until after the break-in period, etc.), but the basic formula will give you a very good idea of your fuel economy regardless of those things.

    There's no need to make this hard. :)
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    my opinion is that there is no 2007 AT Camry in existence that has ever achieved 34 MPG at any time

    You are certainly entitled to your "opinion", but you cannot know that as a fact unless some pretty extraordinary circumstances apply. :)

    "Opinions" are generally irrefutable when they are stated about subjective things such as appearance. But when the word "opinion" is used to convey a sweeping statement of fact, not so much.

    Why don't we just agree that many of the folks here have different outlooks on this subject and stop going around in circles on it for the time being? Let's give it a rest for now.
  • "This is a good example of the type of message language which I believe leads some people to purchase this car and be disappointed. To the contrary, my opinion is that there is no 2007 AT Camry in existence that has ever achieved 34 MPG at any time, no less never get less than 34 mpg as the "worst" highway fuel mileage. I've test driven this car and it does not get 25 mpg on the freeway. I might believe 26, but not 34."

    So now...you aren't claiming that OTHER model year Camrys can't get 34-35 mpg, like my 2005 AT 2AZ-FE? Now we're going to try and defend ONLY 2007 model years? Which have the same motor and tranny as my 2005? I don't PhD, sounds like you keep back pedalling, what are you going to do when someone with a 2007 AT 2AZ-FE powered Camry comes in and verifies what many of the rest of us are experiencing with the last generation ( and the one before that...and before that...and before that )
  • PHD SAYS: Just think about it. If this car (and by "this" I mean an AT, not MT) really got 35 mpg, wouldn't you think someone would be able to run it 600+ miles on a tankful?

    ABLE to? Sure....but problem is why would anyone WANT to? When I drive 5000 miles in 6 days and can limit my fillup error to less than 1% of the fuel used, I sure don't need to get myself stranded in the middle of nowhere because I'm trying to pull some stunt to anwer a hypothetical question that the instant I answer it someone is probably going to call me a liar anyway.

    For the record, cracking 500 miles on the odometer and still having nearly 1/4 tank showing on the gage, it strikes me as quite reasonable I could do 600 on a tank. I just don't know why it can be the only measure of how my 2007 Camry gets 35 mpg and yours doesn't.

    "At high speeds loaded and A/C I could get 33 easy, and at slow eastern speeds I could crack 35"

    PHD's RESPONSE: By "could get", I surmise that you don't. And there aren't a bunch of posts on 600+ mile ranges, are there? I stand by my earlier post.


    No...when I said..."I could get", I should have said " I did get". Denver to Mount Rushmore, 2 adults, 2 kids, a dog, the trunk was full, and I used the A/C while doing 80+. DONE DEAL. Back east, Pennsylvania to Ocean City, back to Ohio, same load, using A/C, 35 mpg. 2005 AT LE 2AZ-FE.

    Your 600+ mile per tank is a strawman, based solely on the concept people don't want to run out of gas in the middle of nowhere, so they won't risk actually proving you wrong on this particular point.

    ( who in the world runs their tanks bone dry by the way? ANYONE? ) :P
Sign In or Register to comment.