Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
The phd guy is never going to accept their validity if he can't duplicate them. You nailed it; he just pops up every few months to complain about all of the alleged inaccuracies. Even when the hosts said to cool it, he still comes up with these requests.
Interesting he had no comment that another poster and I both proved wrong his "impossible" claim that a Camry couldn't go 600+ miles on a single tank of gas.
I really don't have much other comment. I'm not easily baited, and not trying to bait anyone. I just think that continuous data is alot more telling and this would be a good place to view it.
I agree with you that no one disputes a single tank fillup being a maximum error sort of calculation. Being a scientist, I want to QUANTIFY it. It isn't good enough for me to say, "yup...single tank..big error...gotcha", I want to know how BIG it can be, within reason. Can it REALLY be 3 gallons? Or is it usually <1, with an average of X, and a standard deviation of Y, and a maximum of Z.
I gotta agree with that statement, so count me in. Post #636, 12,000 miles of continuous fillups on 2 different Camrys, 2 different generations, 2 different types of trannys, same owner and driver on both, some of the same roads even.
I'll post my next 1600 trip at the beginning of next week, with my overfill/underfill results as well.
For examples of my own, please see posts numbered 478 and 548 in this forum.
My old offer still stands as well: if you temporarily post your e-mail in your profile, I'll send you my complete spreadsheets for both of my Camrys.
On my latest all highway trip of about 1000 miles, I average 28.4mpg with average highway speeds right around 70 mph. Two years ago I made a 2500 mile trip with 85-90% highway miles and averaged 27.5 mpg. I will be taking another 2200 mile trip in July and will post those results when I return.
13.08 258.4 1734
9.57 211.2 1945
10.80 242.7 2188
6.79 139.2 2327
9.50 250 2336.5
12.10 308 2348.6
13.30 351 2361.9
13.80 304 2375.7
13.90 283.8 3824
14.90 381 3838.9
8.80 233 3847.7
I no longer record every fillup since I know pretty much what kind of mileage this car gets. I do it only for long trips.
Check your odo readings. If you add the tank miles, you get 2961 miles. If you subtract first odo from last odo, you only get 2372, some of the odo readings don't change by near as much as the tank miles did starting at around tank 5.
I calculated the mileage for each of the tanks, and quite a few of those weren't bad at all for a V6 around town. I can almost never crack 20mpg in anything around town. and you did it more than a couple times.
My around town mileage is 20-21 in the summer and 17-18 in the winter. I tracked 1125 miles of almost all city driving in Nov/Dec 2005 and averaged 18.25.
My highway mileage has improved since the car was new from 24-26 to 27-29, part (maybe most) of which is driving around 70 instead of 75.
Overall I'm pretty satisfied with this mileage for a V6.
It would be great to configure this forum to collect and share this type of information with others.
In the June 2008 Consumer reports on page 46, 4 cylinder Camry mileage was tested/reported at 40 MPG @ 55 mph, 35 MPG @ 65 mph, and 30 MPG @ 75 mph. This would be with a relatively new test car-and is within the realm of possibility to improve 1or 2 MPG over that with a looser mid life car with half worn tires (new tires use a little more fuel than nearly worn tires).
The Camry has several features which encourage fuel economy at steady speed- it is aerodynamic, the FWD propulsion package has low losses to the drive wheels, it has relatively narrow tires with low rolling resistance, the engine is efficient with VVT, relatively tall gearing in top gear, a high compression ratio, a long stroke and is of modern design. OTOH the Camry is heavy so frequent brake applications tend to kill fuel economy with this car.
I use a Scangauge 2 on my Camry and the number one killer of fuel economy is brake applications- and subsequent resumption of speed. The number one solution is to lift off the gas and anticipate stops/slowdowns-rolling out your kinetic energy rather than turning it into heat in the brakes.
And one last thought- several of the good reports were in western states with high average elevations. Under those conditions the wind load on the car is significantly reduced-using less horsepower to maintain cruising speed. The engine is operating efficiently at part throttle due to the MAP sensor, feedback loop, and computer controlled ignition system. This could be good for another mpg or two.
I'm satisfied with the information being reported as is. It's not that important to me to collect data on every fillup. It's just a mild curiosity as to what mileage others are getting. It's not going to change my driving habits or entice me to buy a different car to improve the mileage. In fact, at this point I have enough info on Camry gas mileage that I can remove this thread from my watch list.
The best thing to do is read the posts you find useful and skip the ones you don't. The "configuration" of this discussion really isn't something you need to worry about.
Please feel free to email me if you have any questions or if you see posts that you feel are inappropriate. I'll be glad to discuss this with you off-line.
Thanks.
I haven't crunched all the numbers yet, but here is my quickie trip this weekend, tank by tank.
ODO MILES GAS MPG
13272 Start
13617 345 9.86 35.0
13813 196 5.14 38.1
14144 331 9.41 35.2
14336 192 5.80 33.1
14726 390 11.31 34.5
14966 240 7.69 31.2
Overall the totals were 1694 miles, 49.2 gallons, 34.4 mpg
Disappointing, because the winds were good, not much A/C was used, and I kept the speeds quite reasonable because the entire trip was interstate. At steady 70-80mph anywhere else I would have expected 35-38mpg, but for some reason I seem to pay a solid 10% penalty in the stretch of I70 between Denver and Salina and I don't have a clue why.
I've mentioned it before, it happens in the old pickup, 3 motorcycles, and nearly every other vehicle I've traveled that section with. Mark my words, if I had continued on I70 to Pennsylvania, somewhere in Missouri things would have gotten better and by Indiana I would be getting 37-38 mpg at the same speeds I was traveling in Kansas.
Anyway, just had to tell you how impressed I am!
My worst for 80mph is usually a solid 34-35. It takes running 100mph to get my mileage down to 30 mpg.
What do you get in short trips? I moved to a small town, and drive about 10 miles a day (average)! It's nice to only fill up about once a month, but I'm getting about 14-18 MPG (which sucks).
I have limited information on only city commuting, I believe 26 mpg on about a half tank is my only data point. I got 14mpg out of a 1/2 ton pickup though, 15mpg out of a 2003 Montero Ltd, the wife's Acura TL got about 18mpg commuting, my Sienna V6 powered minivan is about 17-18mpg.
If I had a 4-banger Camry, I would consider getting 14-18mpg around town a disaster.
I certainly don't. I do however achieve my posted numbers with new or near new machinery with all the obvious things functioning at 100%, tire pressures set, clean air filters, newer tires, really as clean an example of fully functioning machinery as you can get.
My city commuting experience is pretty limited in my 07, not near enough data to proclaim 26 mpg as my average over more than half a tank or so.
My 05 with auto was good for about 24 mpg around town.
Anyway, just had to tell you how impressed I am! "
I wouldn't get all worried about the variation you see here. There appears to be nothing wrong with your driving, your mpg, and hence your car. If it makes you feel any better, I have done controlled long test drives of several replicates of each year model camry as a rental, since buying one in 2004. All the same speed (constant freeway 65 mph), gas source, route (flat, no elevation change), load, and other factors. Your 23-26 mpg is perfectly normal for the 2007-2008 vintage automatics; they are a little less efficient than the 2004-2006 models; which do slightly better (26-28 mpg). I know the later models have the 5-speed auto transmission, but it seems to use just a little more gas - not sure of why this is the case.
Well Keisl, if you take a gander over the past 100+ posts or so where many of us have been posting the actual results of our multi-day, multi-thousand mile trips, you can understand why some might disagree with the particular statement referenced.
You are getting, in a 4 cylinder Camry around town, about the same mileage I got with a 5000#, 300HP+ 4x4 Nissan Titan ( 14mpg ). Now, some might think that is just a-okay, but I have to say that just the physics alone would lead me to believe that something is haywire, SOMEWHERE.
Check back through the posts and you'll discover that some people are doing better around town in their V6 Camrys and minivans ( mine gets 17-18 mpg around town, 3.5L V6, 260HP ) then you reference in your 4 cylinder Camry.
Check out past posts, see what people are both talking about as well as providing in the way of information and analysis, and I think you will find that more than a few would be pretty irritated to get the mileage you reference. I wish there was some way to help people who are getting these absolutely aweful mileage numbers, but mileage can be effected by so many things ranging from mechanical issues with your car to the way you drive it that it is nearly impossible for long range observers to do more than mention the obvious issues we are familiar with.
It is unfortunate that the dealerships can't seem to help out with this problem, more than a few people have taken their cars in only to be told "everything is fine", when obviously, compared to those of us with Camrys doing exactly what is expected of them ( 22-26 mpg around town, 32-38 mpg highway ), it isn't.
I personally have taken more than a "gander" at what has been posted here. A few people post frequently about getting extraordinary mpg's in the 30's; most post a few times that don't get anywhere near that. Like you. But if you evaluate, as I have, the mpg of unique posters (not multiple posts by an individual) and cull out those who have taken their car on such short trips that there would be signficant error in their findings, you will be left with the same conclusion, and mileage, that you are achieving - as the average and median.
Namely - that vintage of car (toyota camry 2007-2008, automatic), should give you about 25 mpg on pure freeway. If you get more, then you should be happier than dorothy after she clicked her heels and woke up in Kansas. And I'm sure Troy is. But, if memory serves, troy is reporting results from a manual shift - which is an entirely different animal. Very little to compare since that transmission is rare.
But if not - then you are right there in the normal range. Nothing at all to worry about.
As to the familiar refrain about the "way you drive"; many of us use cruise control - and, while I keep track of every tankful, the majority of reports appear to be long, freeway speed trips - where variation in driving habit is likely to be minimal (probably you have already tried to tone down the speed -to 65, pumped up the tires to 40#, and set it on cruise, and lo- and- behold, you got the same 25 mpg). This is not "aweful", this are common. And if you're frustrated by those who tell you that its "your driving" and "so many things" that affect mpg, when what you are doing is setting the cruise at 65, or 55, and letting it go 400 miles and seeing it drained empty - well - I can relate to that.
It is what it is....mpg, that is.....its miles/gallons purchased.....city driving in that car will be under 20, and freeway driving under 30 - and closer to 25. Everyone have a nice father's day.
A current Camry driven at 55-60 mpg can even break 40 mpg as plenty of posters here have confirmed.
My Sienna minivan gets about the same numbers as the previous poster gets for a 4-cyl Camry. I have done as well as 32 mpg on a long trip and get about 20 driving around town. Ususally get more like 25 or 26 on the highway though.
On a single tank, predominantly (80%) freeway, I am pulling upwards of 440 miles before the check gas light came on. Driving speed, a constant 64 mph.
Best in quite a while, especially with the mixed driving. Didn't do anything different. May be normal variation. will see if this holds up over time. I'll have to see on my next fillup, and track a few consecutive tanks of gas after that, and report later, as I always do before making any conclusions.
Namely - that vintage of car (toyota camry 2007-2008, automatic), should give you about 25 mpg on pure freeway.
But if not - then you are right there in the normal range. Nothing at all to worry about.
We have before us an "evaluation" which appears to imply that a normal distribution of results for the model year Toyota Camry 2007-2008 ( automatic ) is 25mpg for the highway. The words mean and median are used, but not necessarily quantified in any particular way related to the given distribution or the possible variance involved.
So lets start with the method.
1) Read every post starting at #1.
2) Collect CylinderCount, ModelYear, Post#, Poster Name, Highway mileage, City Mileage and additional references in other posts.
3) Each unique poster only gets 1 estimate per car.
4) Enter everything into an Access database so I can quantify any particular subset of Camrys.
5) Use statistical software to quantify everything possible.
Some of the basics.
120 datapoints.
105 unique posters.
5 missing model year datapoints
11 2004's
17 2005's
12 2006's
47 2007's
2 2008's
7 points with no cylinder references
81 4 cylinders
32 6 cylinders
RESULTS!!!
Highway mileage
Out of 71 4 cylinder cars listed, 61 had highway mileages listed. Data parameters were median=32.0, mean=31.7, SD=4.2 A betageneral distribution was the best match for the data given in this forum ( chi-square ranking was used to determine best distribution ).
For those who perhaps don't play with this information on a regular basis, the SD is an expression within a given population of variance, the medians and means are more central tendencies. For this dataset, to be more than 1 SD low ( 31.7-4.2 = 27.5 ) means that ladies and gentlemen, by any reasonable estimate of the results given in this forum from the time it started, 25mpg on the highway is neither a mean nor a median, and does, in fact, sit below any reasonable expectation of what MOST people can expect from this particular type of auto on the highway from all 4 cylinder versions of this car.
Now lets compare to the much maligned 2007 4-cylinders. A weibull best fits this dataset of 20 points and ladies and gentlemen they are WORSE! Mean mileage is 30.2, SD=3.8, Median is 30.5. So the concept that the 2007 is worse than the population as a whole is reasonable, and hereby quantified as -1.5mpg over the group as a whole.
City mileage?
25 4 cylinders, mean = 22.4, SD = 4.2, median = 22.7
17 of these are 2007's, and their mean=21.6, median=21.5, SD=3.7
How about 6 cylinders?
Highway mileage, mean=29.3, median=30.0, SD=1.98, Triangular distribution works fine
City mileage, mean=21.5, median=21.5, SD=2.96, Normal distribution works fine
CONCLUSIONS:
Data referenced in this forum does NOT support 25mpg for 4 cylinder Camrys as anything other than at LEAST a -1 SD low answer.
Data referenced in this forum does NOT support 25mpg for 6 cylinder Camrys as anything other than at LEAST a -1 SD low answer.
Data referenced in this forum does NOT support 25mpg as a median, mode, or mean under any circumstances whatsoever, for the entire group or any reasonable sized subgroup, including the 2007 models.
Data referenced in this forum DOES support 2007 model years not being as efficient as the referenced group as a whole by 1.5mpg.
Data referenced in this forum supports a difference between 6 cylinder and 4 cylinders of 2.7 mpg, based on the mean.
Data referenced in this forum supports the assumption that achieving EPA numbers is a slightly above average event.
My particular stats for my 2007 Camry numbers at 35mpg are met in approximately the 25th percentile ( have a 25% chance of happening in a given distribution of mileage results ) so my results are most certainly NOTextraordinary.
For my best fit distribution, there is only a 6% or LESS chance that your Camry will fall below someone elses claimed "average" highway mileage, in other words the data in this forum support 25mpg or less happening on the highway only 6% of the time. The corresponding high end (6%) is 38mpg.
In other words, you have an equal chance of achieving 25mpg as you do of achieving 38mpg in a 4-cylinder Camry.
If anyone has any specifics about where their results fall in the spectrum of expected results, feel free to drop me an Edmunds message and I'll check it out for you.
As new data becomes available I will add it to my tables, just to make sure we have real information from here on out. Wouldn't want 25mpg being considered a median (50% probability ) when in fact its only a 6% chance in a betageneral probability distribution.
To reiterate what I said then, and repeat now, I estimate the "quarters" on the toyota gas gage to indicate as follows - 1st ~8 gallons; 2nd~4+ gallons; 3rd~3+ gallons; and the 4th, and last quarter, a little less than 2.5 gallons. So for all those that think they got 40 mpg by thinking they went 200 miles in the first quarter tank; you just used 8 gallons (i.e., 25 mpg), not 5 (i.e., 40 mpg). )
OK - a rejoinder to the data "proving" whatever it is stated above
What this means is alot of the data, unscreened, are biased. Unlike my analysis of similar data a few years ago, Troy didn't include the post #'s (like I did), and didn't screen them for spurious reports (like I did; there are all sorts of people who "think they get" X miles per gallon, or people who do one fillup, some of which go for a quarter tank, and some who look at the gas gage and think they go X miles on 1/2 a tank or 1/4 a tank, etc, etc, etc.) After this is cleaned up - you are left with about 26 mpg, more or less, but not much on the more side. Been there, done that, and alot more with the data. It was a bit more challenging then, because we didn't have a separate MPG discussion. But I did do a fairly thorough search. Nothing has come about that changes the basic result.
Not looking at the source of the data, how it is collected, and what is reported, doesn't paint a true picture. Most of the reports here are single tanks. Based on the refill error (at least 2.4 gallons), I wouldn't consider less than 3 consecutive tankfuls, and there are very few of those reported at all. Alot of the "data" aren't worth much.
I really thought I had 27. Oh well, maybe I'll drop down to 60 mph and see if that does anything. Oh, I forgot, I tried that 2 years ago - didn't do a thing. But maybe now with 50,000 miles - my car is "broken in". I bet if I didn't drive any city, I might get 28.
And for the dude who thinks there's something "wrong" with cars that don't get over 30 if driven right, I sure would like to know precisely what that "wrong" is. If you know of a SINGLE CASE where someone had a car that got "only" 25-28 mpg on the freeway, and brought it into a dealer and the "fixed it". Let's have it. Tell us what is "wrong". I'm serious.....what is it? go for it. I'll try it. Otherwise, what the heck is the point?
As for the "something wrong (if you don't get at least 30 mpg on the freeway), I kinda doubt it, since a minimum of 8 rental vehicles, all different years, all toyota camry, driven on table top flat ground between Fresno and Redding, churned out the same mileage as mine.
No big deal. I don't mind the discussion. It's great.
Data bias exists in both directions. Please show us how only people getting good mileage are posting in this forum. I find it more reasonable to expect people who are ticked off by their terrible mileage would post in this forum, as evidenced by at least you and Keisl who have been unhappy since the beginning of this discussion ( you, Post #26, Keisl, Post #152 ).
Deleting data you don't like is called "altering it" and is a perfect way to bias a particular dataset in any direction one would like. For example, I am the only person who has posted multi-day, multi thousand mile trips on multiple Camrys I have OWNED and then posted all the tanks and calculated actual fillup error, because of my thoroughness, I am the only one with "good" data, I shall only count MY data, and presto, Camrys get an average and median of 35 mpg on the highway with a SD = 0.
Not looking at the source of the data, how it is collected, and what is reported, doesn't paint a true picture. Most of the reports here are single tanks. Based on the refill error (at least 2.4 gallons), I wouldn't consider less than 3 consecutive tankfuls, and there are very few of those reported at all. Alot of the "data" aren't worth much.
The source of the data is us, for better or worse. The only information in evidence on fillup error is MINE, and the error has been approximated at about 6oz of fuel, not 2.4 gallons. Please feel free to post your analysis on fillup error, I have already done so, and it isn't any closer to 2.4 gallons than the forums average mileage calculation is 25 mpg.
As for the "something wrong (if you don't get at least 30 mpg on the freeway), I kinda doubt it, since a minimum of 8 rental vehicles, all different years, all toyota camry, driven on table top flat ground between Fresno and Redding, churned out the same mileage as mine
Your displeasure with Toyota for not "fixing" your Camry is well known. Speaking of good data, I would advocate we eliminate all mileage points posted by rental units on the grounds that when we rent them we aren't intimate with their maintenance history, which can be crucial to achieving maximum performance.
As an afterthought, if you have rented 7 Camrys and been unhappy and knowledgable about their mileage, why did you purchase one and then expect anything different?
I'm happy as a clam:
That's because toyota camry's get 25-28 mpg and I'm right there. The reason I rent the cars and carefully assess mileage is because there are websites out there where people claim much higher.
I look at it as a public service. Alot of people read edmunds. I wouldn't want people to be unhappy that they can't match some other mileage.
here's the goal: "I WOULDN'T WANT ANYONE TO BUY A CAMRY WITH THE EXPECTATION OF 30 MPG AS TYPICAL FREEWAY MILEAGE."
No one should go into the showroom to buy that car, for that reason. Camrys are not gas hogs - but look at the thing. Is THAT the size car you think is going to turn 30 mpg. But then you look at the sticker, well, the older stickers, before the government clamped down on the bloated EPA estimates (if you read the fine print, those estimates came from Toyota, who sends them to the EPA) and think Hmmmmm. I can have my big car cake and get big time mileage as well. Common sense goes out the window.
But the first impression is usually the correct one. Big car = big gas consumption.
And about unhappy that my car isn't fixed? I don't think its broken.
What you should expect - with the boat-like huge camry's they've made the last few years, is about 25. Maybe 27 if you really skip the rest stops (not that these boats have done that for me). That's all folks.
Last word: Before anybody buys a car, especially this car - go rent one - any one, fill it to the brim (you can see the gas), and drive it as far as you can and do a refill. No cheating now. no one click and "oboy I got 40 mpg". fill it right up to the brim. that's it. keep putting that gas in and let it settle. What? you put in 18 gallons? you look under the car for a leak. there isn't any. so your 450/15=30 just became 450/17.7=25.
You want to know the mileage on this car before you buy it? then drive it. Buyer beware of anything written on a sticker
And yes, any one of those models in 4-cyl or V6 form (with the exception of 09 Mazda6 - not available yet), including the Camry, can beat 30MPG on a long Highway trip, even the Sonata with its inefficient engine. Even the much larger Avalon.
The numbers in this and other forums, and Troy's analysis easily support that.
Your Camry does not. It is more of an exception than the rule. Any of your rentals cannot be counted because you don't have multi-tank data for those and in order to measure a car's MPG, you need at least 3-4 tanks of data. Especially with a rental, since you are not starting out with a truly full tank in most cases.
Public service would be to report your MPG in this forum, not argue with people and tell them they are not getting the MPG that they are actually getting.
Took me about 2 evenings, reading through each post, referencing updates when they came along and such. I was surprised that in 700+ posts there were only 100+ datapoints, but its because we BS as well as post mileage, plus there are some prolific posters who put up all their tanks, and each poster only gets 2 mileage points per vehicle.
Gotta agree with you PhD. To whit...there is a 73% chance of getting better than 30mpg on the highway with a 4 cylinder camry of any particular vintage contained within the dataset. ( BetaGeneral with a mean of 31.69mpg, SD of 4.2, truncated at 17,49.
Anyone can build their own fractiles of probability from that distribution so they know EXACTLY what the odds are of achieving a particular mileage.
While I like bench racing mileage as much as anyone, I think I'll stick with the actual data in evidence on this one.
Now that I have over 30K miles we're regularlly getting low 30's highway miles (without trying for good mileage)......but you already have a datapoint from me a long time ago.
I am witnessing a steady decline over time in results and at this point my in-town numbers are 23-24mpg and my multiple road trip results are down to ~32+ mpg at 72mph. Not only that, but there is a noticeable reduction in mid and high rpm thrust. So far I have only changed the oil as normal, put in a new air filter and made sure I was at my normal cold 36psi in my tires. The engine runs as smooth as ever (1999 4-cyl auto w/ 100,000 miles). My 0-60 times, that used to run about 10 seconds, are now down to 11.5 sec.
I suspect that something is going slowly 'bad'. I am not enthusiastic about spending $500 for a new catalytic converter or about the same for a new O2 sensor or computer as that kind of money buys a lot of gasoline to make up the difference in mileage, but I suspect that I will eventually get it looked at in the future.
Anyway, whatever it turns out to be could shed some light on why there are significant discrepancies in various owners mpg results. On an interesting note, my other Camry (2004 4-cyl auto w/ 35,000 miles) still gets 36-37 on the road at 72mph and has shown no change in performance. This just about rules out a change in ethanol content as they both use the same gasoline.
I'll let you know...
Drem
I have you down for 30mpg, referencing Posts #257 and #372. If your highway mileage is better than that now, what would the new number be?
And I don't have a definitive city mileage for you...do you have a solid one I can put you down for?
I have your 2004 down for 36.5/24.1 referencing Post #397 and #763, and your 1999 down for 40/25.5 referencing Post# 397 and #763.
You also referenced a 1993 in Post#397, I have it entered as 31/19.
If anything isn't accurate, let me know. I'm looking for uncertainty around endpoints, within reason, which is why I don't use your 44 mpg. I try and give fair credit for both highs and lows, but I really don't think its reasonable for me to use some of the "slow" highway numbers, because its obvious we can really skew the results to a bunch of us driving 50mph trying to hit 45mpg just to mess with the results. I want real highway speeds, which is 65+ or so. For example, I don't use my 42 mpg tank as my best number, I use a 35mpg because its my usual result at 75+ mph.
But that's a 1999. Different animal. Are you sure you are actually going that much different of a distance (and not something about the odometer, or associated hardware/cable).
Anyway - back on topic......real world mpg.....in an attempt to tease out the effect of speed; I have been testing speed over long range freeway driving in increments of about 3 mph - and believe I have discovered a modest increase in mileage at a top speed of 61 mph. I have gone almost 530 miles on a tank. If this hold for 3 consecutive tanks - I may be in for a true 30 mpg. A 10% increase above my average mileage, and the mileage of the 8 other rental cars I have tried for comparison.
But boy is that 61 mph slow. I would much rather do 65. I am getting passed by semi's and such.
Anyhow, this converts to something just short of 30 mpg, that's with hypermiling at constant and maximum 61 mph, minimal city driving at such time that I was turning off the car at lights, coasting in neutral, no A/C, wailing up the tires to 40 #, and so forth.
Congradulations...you have just joined the club of "The Impossibles"!
Myself, I have to FORCE my Camry to get 30 mpg through the use of 90+ mph speeds and big headwinds, I still am looking for an excuse to try and crack the 40mpg barrier using slow speeds and hypermiling techniques.
Of course it is driven gently with an operating range of 1600-2500rpm except for mountain driving and other long hills. It still has the factory brakes and clutch in it.
Pretty good. Definitely on the higher end for highway mileage, but if you can really manage a roadtrip at 60mph it isn't unexpected. I've cracked 40 on a tank done mostly at 65mph or so, but BOY is it hard for me to do roadtrips under 70mph.
I have hopes of making my clutch and brakes last as long, my car is exclusively a highway traveler, which should be easy on both.
I have one, and I'll join the club, but that's a different club. Mine has 272, oops, make that 282,000 miles on it, and it gets a consistent 27 mpg in mixed driving; 30+ on every freeway trip (max 35+).
I'm even more convinced by the recent posts that manual shifts get consistently 15-20% better mileage than their equivalent vintage automatics. The EPA mileage ratings are even less relevant, as they rate the manual a mpg or so lower, if memory serves, for the camry.
And as far as your "welcome" to the club; that club has no members yet - my "challenge" was for anyone to put together three, not one, consecutive tankfuls of 600 miles on a tank - or 630 miles on a single tank. I'm not changing the game here, go read my original post. I don't put much stock at all in single tankful mpg's, even my own.
And let's talk apples here (automatic transmissions), not oranges.
I'm even more convinced by the recent posts that manual shifts get consistently 15-20% better mileage than their equivalent vintage automatics. The EPA mileage ratings are even less relevant, as they rate the manual a mpg or so lower, if memory serves, for the camry.
And let's talk apples here (automatic transmissions), not oranges.
Please review Post#636 for the difference between two 2AZ-FE engined Camrys ( 2005,2007), low mileage, same owner, prime shape, one auto, one manual.
1-2 mpg translates to 3-6% difference in fuel mileage if you assume that the two generations of Camry are roughly equal in all other parameters. They aren't, but the EPA ranked both cars ( 2005 auto and 2007 stick ) as nearly the same mileage, which seems reasonable for a 3-6% difference. 15-20% would show up on an EPA sticker, and it doesn't.
first fillup from dealership
397.2 miles
14.074 gallons
=28.222 mpg
about 40% city driving/no cruise control
second fillup
274.1 miles
8.174 gallons
=33.533 mpg
95% highway driving w/ less than 3% cruise control
first fillup from dealership
=28.222 mpg
about 40% city driving/no cruise control
second fillup
=33.533 mpg
95% highway driving w/ less than 3% cruise control
Got'im. Odds are you'll get better highway as the car breaks in, and worse with nonstop city riding. Let us know, particularly with the city. I'll give you 33.5mpg highway for starters in the database, and leave the city mileage blank for now.
2007 Camry LE I4-5 speed auto. Current mileage is 33K, original tires (at 2 lbs over cold tire pressure), and just changed the oil/filter this weekend using regular standard 5w20 oil. I've had the 2nd TSB (036-07) for engine performance/transmission shifting from a year or so ago, have NOT had the most recent TSB performed yet. Filled up fuel before and after trip at the same gas station, same pump, low pressure fill at same clickoff, regular no-name el-cheapo gas. Relatively flat rolling hills of I-85 through NC and VA. 88 degree temperature outside, windows up, air conditioner on. Three people with luggage. 98% highway interstate driving, all highway driving solely using cruise control at posted speed limit (75% of the miles @ 65mph, 25% of the miles @ 70 mph). Mileage and speed validated w/GPS.
This is in the very typical range of low 30's mpg that we get with this vehicle on highway trips. Normally cruise about 5 mph faster, and don't always rely solely on the cruise control, but since no hurry this trip decided to let the control do all the work.
Got it. Let me know when you think you have an honest city number, I don't have one for your 2007 listed.
(2) fill the tank up all the way to the top. The filler neck in the camry is such that it causes the pumps to "click" prematurely. About 3.5 gallons of air is left in the tank. To fill the tank completely requires "topping off" very slowly, for this particular vehicle.
(3) Drive the car farther. Due to error in (2), above, small volumes of gas (11-14 gallons), such as a recent post provided, have large effects of refill errors. This error is reduced as the volume of gas is increased. For gaging purposes, the gas light comes on after about 16 gallons have been used (2.5 gallons left, approximate remaining range of 50 miles, more or less).
(4) Please give the miles driven, and the gas quantity purchased
(5) Please indicate whether or not, for multiple readings, the reported miles and quantities were for consecutive tank refills.
I would be very interested in anyone who has a documented case in which a vehicle was brought in with mpg recordings of less than 30 mpg (say 25-28 mpg) and, as a consequene, had an actual malfunction detected and corrected, which improved the mileage. This would be very helpful to those of us who do not achieve 30 mpg.
Thank you very much!