Howdy, Stranger!

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





Toyota Corolla Real World MPG

11516171820

Comments

  • Thanks, I guess the city mileage will suffer the most with the extra weight when starting from a full stop. Once up to speed, I'm sure the improved aerodynamics would offset the weight penalty somewhat. I wonder if the electric power steering makes much difference?
  • mcdawggmcdawgg Posts: 1,666
    Electric power steering improves mpg, but probably not more than 0.5 mpg. However, if you combine all these minor mpg improvements, it can start to add up. For as much as the Toyota haters like to complain/talk down about the Corolla, it really delivers excellent mpg, only beat by a diesel and a hybrid in CR real world mpg tests. Just wait until the next generation comes out, no doubt with a 5 or 6 speed auto and (hopefully) a 6 speed manual, along with many other improvements. Then, it will have even better mpg.
  • terceltomterceltom Posts: 1,017
    I have plenty of Corollas right now, a Miata MX5 and a Plymouth Voyager; I told myself no more vehicles until they debut a Corolla "plug-in". I guess we'll be talk'in Miles Per Kilowatt Hour then.
  • 1999 non-VVTI 5-speed Stick averaged 28MPG city (NYC) and 40MPG Highway in the winter.
    1999 Non-VVTI 5-speed Stick Averaged 26MPG City (NYC with AC on) Highway 38MPG with AC on.

    2003 Corolla LE 5-speed Stick shift Averaged 30MPG city (NYC) and Highway 46MPG
    2003 Corolla LE 5-speed Stick Shift Averaged 28MPG city (NYC With AC on) Highway 43MPG with AC on.

    If you drive it like you stole it you get roughly 26mpg average in the 99 and 30 average in the 03.

    Ultimately the 99 was more comfortable to drive in, better seating position and better quality materials on the interior.. so while the 03 was better on gas, id take the 99 due to comfort.. I'm convinced the 03 was designed for monkeys... short legs and long arms..
  • hoopitup2000hoopitup2000 Posts: 46
    edited May 2012
    How fast are you driving on the highway; 50 MPH?

    Sorry, but I can't imagine the '03 Corolla is averaging those numbers at realistic highway speeds. The '05 is only 28 pounds heavier & averages 40-42 MPG at 65 MPH under ideal conditions. I've only seen 45 MPG once in almost 7 years & it was likely a calculation error.
  • I am in the hoopitup camp. I own a 2005 Corolla LE auto. fueleconomy.gov says 31.5 mpg average with 61 samples. I am averaging between 34 and 34.5 in with about 75% highway driving. I suspect that the 5 speed manual would yield about 2-3 more mpg. I live in So Cal. I think that the people claiming 45 mpg are cherry picking specific runs with mostly highway miles at slow speeds and maybe even downhill terrain.

    Don't buy a Corolla automatic if you are expecting more than ~ mid 35 mpg with mostly highway driving.

    My highest ever was 90+% freeway driving with no traffic slowness and yielded about 37.4. I suspect the car is capable of 38 with the cruise control on driving 65-70 on almost 100% highway driving.

    If you driving suburb city driving in a planned community then you can probably expect around 30 mpg. If you are driving in a dense urban area, it is going to be much lower (26 or worse).
  • terceltomterceltom Posts: 1,017
    I could imagine 45 under ideal conditions driving at speeds of 55 mph. By your own example of seeing 40-42 mpg at speeds of 65 mph getting 45 is not unlikely because your best mpg occurs at speeds of 55 mph.
  • tucson_miketucson_mike Posts: 11
    Early on, I thought I was getting about 39mpg on by 2006 corolla manual. But then I calibrated my odometer and found I needed to adjust its reading by about 0.97 for the effect of my tires being worn down. So for instance, going by the mile markers on the interstate, I found a 100miles by those markers showed 103 on my odometer. Since the tires were physically a little lower diameter, they had to rotate further (picked up by the odometer) to get the same distance. A 3% decrease in circumference is less than a 1% decrease in tire height is another way to say it. Making that adjustment got the mpg back to about 38mpg.

    Once I got new tires, had to go the other way slightly, and increase my recorded odometer by 1%.

    Anyway, it is great to see super high mpg. Where you are getting that, check if your tires are worn down a bit and calibrate the odometer reported to actual miles is an easy adjustment to take that estimate out of the range of reported results.
  • Great observation Mike!! I'm wondering if this is common on the Corolla?

    I discovered by accident that my odometer is off by 2 miles every 100 as well. To confirm this, I re-checked on another roadway to make sure the mile markers weren't to blame. Still off by 2 miles every 100 on an interstate highway.
  • I'm considering purchasing a new Corolla. The listed mileage isn't that great (26/34). Current car is a Civic and it easily gets 30-32 city during the warmer months. So...I don't want to go down a lot but like the Corolla. What is the real world mileage in the city (where I do most of my driving)? What about highway? I see many reporting close to 40, but they have older models, which seemed to be given higher mpg ratings. Thanks!
  • mcdawggmcdawgg Posts: 1,666
    Well, if you look at Consumer Report's real world mpg test, it says that the Corolla is best in class, except for a hybrid and a diesel.

    My experience is it is easy to get 37 mpg on the highway at a steady 70 mph, light winds, 40+ degrees F. If slower than 70, not a problem to get 39 mpg.

    City - it does very well also, but it is too hard to compare one person's "city" with anothers. That's why I say compare Consumer Report's real world mpg.
  • terceltomterceltom Posts: 1,017
    I currently have three Corollas, I have a 1992, 2001 and a 2009 and I never got better then 28 mpg with 90 % city driving on any of my Corollas. Highway is another story, I can easily get 38 with any of them with the A.C. on and cruising at 65 mph. That being said, I love all of my Corollas. The only other small car I would even consider would be a Mazda 3.
  • What year is your Civic?
    I just looked on www.fueleconomy.gov
    I compared the 2013 Corolla, 2012, 2007 & 2000 Civics, all 5-speeds:
    2013 Corolla - 27 city, 34 hwy
    2012 Civic - 28/36
    2007 Civic - 26/34
    2000 Civic - 27/33

    The 2000 Civic is 1.6L, others are 1.8L
  • My Civic is a 2005. It is rated, I believe, at 29 city, but I have had no problem getting over 30 during the warmer months in city driving. (The same exact kind of driving got me only 18-19 in a 2000 Camry (rated at 23 city), so I'm wondering if Toyota inflates their mileage ratings or finds some way to list them higher. My Civic is a manual. The Camry was an automatic. Of course, a new Civic would probably cost $2000 more than the Corolla, which would compensate money wise for the extra gas but it wouldn't do the environment or our national oil consumption any good.
  • mcdawggmcdawgg Posts: 1,666
    Toyota does not "inflate" their mileage ratings any more than Honda. They all are EPA ratings, not individual ratings, and all the makers try to score the highest possible on the EPA test. Did you check out Consumer Reports' real word mpg ratings?

    For 100,000 miles, but the car costs $2,000 more, you would have to have much more mpg to make it worth it. For example, at 28.5 mpg a new Civic is 3.5 mpg better than a Corolla, but $2,000 more, then it is break even.= 25 mpg. At 34mpg vs 29 mpg, that is break-even. Assuming $4.00 per gallon.

    I have no problems getting EPA or better on a 2010 Camry with a 6 speed manual, or 2010 Corolla auto.
  • terceltomterceltom Posts: 1,017
    I don't believe Toyota or any other automobile manufacturer "inflates" their EPA gas mileage ratings but I do believe the EPA ratings are mostly unrealistic. It's just a measure of how to gauge one car over another as far as one being better on gas then the other.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,407
    The manual transmission is the difference. The EPA ratings favor automatics. It is easy to beat the EPA ratings in a manual.
  • terceltomterceltom Posts: 1,017
    I suppose if you terribly under rev the motor and really labor it, you might be able to match or even beat the EPA MPG ratings; but who wants to drive like that ?
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,407
    When I say beat them I mean by like 10 mpg. My '07 Accord stick is rated 31 highway and I have averaged 35 mpg for 160,000 miles. More than 60 tanks have been over 40 mpg. My '90 Integra actually gets worse mpg, but it is only rated at 26mpg highway. I very rarely have a tank under 30mpg in that car and it can get 40 mpg occasionally.

    Never heard of an MT that could not easily beat EPA ratings.
  • terceltomterceltom Posts: 1,017
    Well if the 2013 Corolla is rated at 27 city and 34 hwy and your going to tell me you can "easily beat" that and get 37 city and 44 hwy consistantly without altering your driving habits severly I would have to ask, do you use 1st and 2nd gear at all ? ? ? ? LOL
Sign In or Register to comment.