Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
And if you wanted the FE of a hybrid like the Prius... you should have purchased a hybrid in the first place.
Automakers are bought off...umm...I mean very, very slow to make automobiles that actually save consumers fuel cost money. Or electrical costs if you own an all-electric. It's just going to be a long haul. Most of us have realized this and have just been enjoying our rigs for the 2000-2013 era of making rigs that are about saving ghastly money. Let's face it, iluvmysephia1 calls gasoline "ghastly" for a reason...it's cost is absolutely ghastly. </b
There's no other way to deal with it. Too much money for the fuel here! It's really irritating! And carmakers are bought off...whoops...I...mean just can't seem to make rigs that get 100 smiles per gallon. You'd have to gerry rig your Hyundai/Kia's engine to do that. Wouldn't you?
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
2011 Elantra GLS Auto with 22650 miles.
Indicated mpg (dash display): 34.8/pumped refuel average 33.1 mpg
Average mph: 28 mph (mostly city driving)
Display seems to be consistently about 2 mpg "optimistic."
I could not be happier with my Elantra. It's roomier, quieter, more efficient and better looking (subjectively, I know) than my wife's 2010 Civic EX.
I would recommend this car to anyone and I have.
Question for eweiner: Is anyone else who disagrees with you or has had great mileage with their Elantra a "jerk?"
I applaud Hyundai for their fine automobile. They have done a superb job.
YMMV (literally)
I think my own credibility is intact having, for instance, predicted lawsuits for Hyundai over this issue many moons ago. If you choose to play Pollyanna for Hyundai and the U.S. government I guess that is your choice (or job?) but I think most would not openly claim such a naive understanding of how business, in general, really works.
While I don't (yet) claim any specific knowledge of this kind of 'backroom agreement' between the U.S. gov and Hyundai, I think it naive to not consider it as a factor. Is it so outrageous to suggest that our government might have been lenient with Korea on the eve of a hard won Free Trade Agreement which focused mainly on agriculture and auto sales issues, a kind of NAFTA EAST? Do deals such as this get convoluted and corrupted by so many interests, players, and pieces? Yes, of course they do. Might this somehow have played into the government's handling of Hyundai's business in the U.S. ? I suggest at least reading up on the Free Trade Agreement with Korea before responding.
And assuming we can agree on the fact that Hyundai knew its mileage info and advertising were untrue, do you think they might have figured the down side of that calculated risk into their profits/losses?
Their payout for this lie is so low relative to the losses incurred by consumers that it is laughable. Maybe someone can crunch some numbers about their profits vs. their losses as a result of the lawsuits. I think it's pretty clear that this is a very small financial 'dent in their bumper', although I wonder if they also calculated the anger and loss of customer loyalty into their plan?
One of their selling points was that a purchaser could count on a good return on resale for this car due to its great mileage and popularity. I doubt that will be the case, so I think Hyundai should also be forced to pay out a fixed rate for resale of anyone wishing to dump their cars. At the very least this loss at the back end should also be calculated into a compensation package.
http://southtownstar.suntimes.com/news/16807685-418/more-area-consumers-suing-hy- undai-over-inflated-fuel-economy.html
Monday’s suit demands reimbursement of the full cost of the vehicle to owners, and seeks to force Hyundai to turn over its profits from the sale of the vehicles. The suit also aims to halt what it calls “false advertising” about mileage claims, and asks the carmaker to “disseminate an informational campaign to correct its misrepresentations and material omissions.”
Sure. IMO, a legitimate complaint is one that is backed by efforts to determine if the vehicle is capable of attaining its EPA ratings. I have posted umpteen times in these FE discussions a fairly simple process to do that. Not once--never--has someone come back and told us the results of that test. That told me something about the complaint.
Why do I think it's important to determine if a vehicle is capable of attaining its EPA ratings, if the owner isn't achieving them? Because of something that many people who complain about fuel economy forget: YMMV. There's LOTS of reasons someone is not getting the EPA ratings on a car. There could be a defect in the car. There could be something else wrong with the car, e.g. got a bad batch of gas or someone tried to put E15 in it (which Hyundai says is a no-no). It could be driven in conditions not at all comparable to how the EPA runs its tests. It could be due to how the car is driven. etc.
So the first step is to determine if the car CAN meet its EPA rating. If not, figure out why it isn't, with help from the dealer and manufacturer. If you determine the car can meet its EPA ratings, then figure out what if anything can be done to driving habits/style to improve FE. Maybe there isn't anything that can be done; maybe there is but the driver is unable or unwilling to make the necessary adjustments.
FWIW, I have driven this car. In what I consider very much "real world" conditions: in Austin, TX, in mid-summer (100+ degree weather), combination of downtown, suburban, and urban highway driving. A lot of stop and go, not much cruising. And on a nearly-new car I easily exceeded the EPA numbers. And I wasn't trying as hard to save gas as I do on my own cars, as I didn't have to pay for the gas. But put a different driver behind the wheel of the same car, and the odds are pretty good it would NOT hit the EPA number.
And if you've read test reports on the car, e.g. from Popular Mechanics, you'll see they were able to get close to if not meet or exceed the EPA numbers under moderate driving. So it's not just moi.
It can be done. Not everyone has driving patterns that allow it. And for those who do, not all of them will be willing to do what's needed (e.g. light foot on the gas, anticipate stops, no lengthy idling).
Re all the angst about Hyundai restating the FE on the Elantra... do you realize we're talking a difference of one mpg (average) between the old EPA rating and the corrected one? ONE MPG! And that number has been scrutinized and verified by the EPA. So if someone isn't hitting that revised number... methinks they should be looking someplace other than Hyundai for an answer--unless there's a defect in the car.
I'd also like to add that most of the complainers probably greatly underestimate the amount of city-like driving they actually do. For example, driving 25 mph with stop-and-go conditions on the freeway during rush hour counts as city driving, not Hwy. This is why you have to also look at the MPH calculation to understand why you're not getting the EPA numbers. If your average MPH is in the 20s, you're driving mostly city.
Another thing that a lot of people don't realize is that with the EPA City test, the avg idle time for a stop sign/light is about 14 secs. In the real world, the idle times can be as much as 180 secs.
First off. This is the twenty first centurey. A 2012 Elantra should get better or as good mpg as my 1990 Honda Civic EX, Avg 34.5 MPG. The Elantra will not even break 30MPG on a early Sunday morning on I.5 at 65MPH wth echo on from Seattle to Tacoma. The Honda 43.5 MPG doing the same trip. Second, the Elantra has come a long ways. Comfertable, decent power, great brakes,reliable. But the rear suspencion recieves a big fail. Conastoga wagon has better. I did not buy this car just for the milage, but was a big part of it.
But the one thing it NEVER has been is the equal of the Civic in terms of fuel economy. On the highway, the Civic–driven without any regard for fuel consumption (i.e., between 75 and 85 mph come hell or high water)–consistently delivered 38 mpg. If I was forced to drive nearer the posted limits–such as during the tail end of rush hour–the Civic would console me with as much as 43 mpg. Mixed city/hwy driving ranged from 28 to 32. NEVER, ever did the Civic return less than 26 mpg.
The Elantra? During a 12 mile stretch early one Monday morning coming back from Vancouver BC, I got snarled in nascent rush hour traffic on I-405 South just past Lynnwood that brought me down to between 45 and 55 mph, during which time I averaged 43 mpg on what is essentially a flat stretch of freeway. And that was the last time I saw average mileage greater than 38 mpg INDICATED–which must be emphasized because the indicated mileage is ALWAYS optimistic by no less than 2 mpg. The actual typical highway fuel economy I got was between 34 and 36 mpg if I kept my speed no greater than 65 mph and was lucky enough to not have to climb any hills. You see, the Elantra seems EXTREMELY sensitive to grades. As in "it sucks gas to generate the power necessary to get up even modest inclines."
Unfortunately, everywhere I drive involves cresting some kind of hill (I'm in the lowest part of Redmond, WA, and everything is uphill). Consequently, in city driving, I'm blessed if I can keep the mileage above 20 mpg (22 mpg indicated). Actually, it's not a blessing so much as me devoting myself to driving like an old lady. Which sucks enough that when I started reading that the new Honda Accord–despite being larger; heavier; burdened with larger, drag-inducing 18-inch wheels and tires; and more powerful and comfortable–gets REAL WORLD fuel economy better than my Elantra's REAL WORLD mileage, I went to try one out last week and wound up signing on the dotted line, leaving the Hyundai behind to charm then frustrate somebody else. Guess what, the Accord (I got the Sport sedan) actually DOES get significantly better mileage. In mixed driving so far–the same routes I traveled routinely in my Elantra–it's averaging 32 mpg (compared to 26 mpg max in the Elantra). I know: I'm comparing apples to oranges, but while waiting to take delivery of the Accord, I was giving a spanking new 2013 Honda Civic LX, and for the day that I drove it, it delivered even better fuel economy in the same mixed driving: 38 mpg. On the highway I saw sustained 43 mpg with the "ECON" button engaged. So, anyone concerned with maximum mileage: look beyond the Elantra's pretty face and check out the competition.
Speaking of frustrations (and disappointments), my Elantra didn't age well at all. By the time we parted company, the dash had developed a fistful of consistent creaks and buzzes–centered around that snazzy-looking, multi-part center stack–that drove me crazy! And the beige seats were stain magnets, even if they are relatively easy to clean.
But at 50,000 miles my tranny did go out. But the warranty covered a new one minus the $180 they charged me to flush it first while they were "guessing" what the problem was.. Other than that no problems.
Still, that's a lot of additional expense and trouble, using fuel additives AND high octane gas, to just match the kind of mileage my 2006 Civic easily achieved buzzing along at 3000 rpm and 80-plus MPH on the highway with ARCO 87 octane fuel and a trunk full of luggage and photo gear.
What I am doing, and what I would recommend that everyone begin doing, is to tell everyone what you know about your Hyundai. The car companies rely on word of mouth for some of their advertising and sales, and if all of us are good about spreading the word and giving people our honest opinions, it may not help those of us that have already been taken in, but it will help to keep others from making the same mistake. I don't like being lied to to get me to buy a product, so my mission has become to let everyone know about Hyundai's lack of honesty in their marketing campaigns. All we can do, it seems, is to spread the word.
I hope time flies and you're out of the lease before you know it.
Round trip DFW/San Antonio. Three adults with luggage and approx 75 mph cruising.
The mpg display showed (believe it or not) 40.2 mpg for the almost 700 mile trip. Some driving around the Alamo City, but mostly hwy.
As usual, the display was overly optimistic. Actual gallons added yielded a mpg of 37.9; still not too bad. If we slowed down, probably could have gotten close to the 40 mpg advertised, if not nailed it.
Normal around town is 34 mpg on the display and 32 by gallons filled.
Couldn't be happier and much better mpg than wife's 2010 Civic EX.
It is fairly level on I-35, but we had strong winds out of the south (who doesn't in TX) so it hurt going down but helped coming back north. I counted that a wash.
I identify myself as the "cruise control" owner because I have found that if I use the cruise control every opportunity I am able, my mileage increases measurably.
Now... I have been scolded by others on this forum that I should not use cruise at all in city/urban driving. I am not sure why those individuals feel that way. My cruise disengages when I hit my brake pedal, which is how I slow down anyway. I am not sure how they slow down. All kidding aside, I acknowledge their advice but ignore it. To me, if I want to go, the accelerator is depressed, whether by me or the cruise. If I want to slow, I hit the brake pedal.
Maybe I just have a good one. It's an early model 2011 actually made in Korea. I have gone 60 mph for short periods (50-60 miles on the Interstate) after resetting my dash indicator and have seen in the low to mid 40s mpg, but once again, I am sure that display is 2-3 mpg overstated.
My biggest gripes with the car was/is: No spare (which I have remedied with a full size spare on an alloy wheel), the optimistic mpg display and the flimsy floor mats. I did take the car into the local Hyundai dealer and they replaced the 2011 mats with the much more sturdier 2013 version.
Besides those items, the car has been flawless. Now, if it just wouldn't hail every year...
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/EdmundsForums
It's really important for us to hear from our members and visitors to get direction going forward. Only good things are planned for the future, but we need to gather insights to get there! Whether it's your first time or you're a regular, we'd love to hear from you.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
Last weekend, I went with a co-worker to trade her 2012 Elantra for a Honda CR-V. I hadn't been in an Elantra since trading my 2013 for an Accord. While at the dealership, I went outside to move the car and was shocked by how cheap and crude the interior materials are, how rough the engine was at idle and how unrefined all the switchgear felt compared to the Accord, and even the 2013 Civic I had for a day before taking delivery of the Accord. While that's all subjective, I can't feeling like the Elantra after a year feels like an 8-10 year old car.
I am glad for Hyundai, however, you and clearly many others are happy with their cars and are having positive ownership experiences. If mine was representative, they would go out of business.
I even have tried driving at a slow acceleration rate wherever I go and went an entire tank not exceeding 2 rpgs stopping and going. Before anyone says it is my "driving habits", trust me I have tried all the tricks of the trade.
To make matters worse, the entire reason I bought this car was because my 2012 Sonata was getting even worse mileage and I drove that car mainly freeway. Needless to say, in order to get out of that car, I had to roll over some negative equity into this car which I didn't mind because I was promised the mpg would be much better. I am now stuck with another Hyundai with about $3,000 of negative equity that does not live up to the advertisements or the promises I was given.
Hyundai lied to me twice; fool me once shame on, you fool me twice shame on me. I will never recommend Hyundai or Kia to anyone. I hope and pray every day that someone hits me and totals my car or someone steals it so I can get out of this P.O.S. I would rather walk to work with no car and a broken leg then continue paying anything for this vehicle. I would love if someone shares my situation and had some advice?
BTW, unless you purchased GAP coverage with your Elantra, totaling the car isn't likely to make things much better than trading it in now and carrying forward that "negative equity" because the value of the Elantra that the insurance will pay you is very likely less than what you owe, and the difference is going to remain your responsibility.
Maybe you need to read up on the test procedures to understand why you're not getting 38+ on the hwy.
Our car is now sounding like a monster truck with big knobby tires and vibrates so much it shakes the seats, not to mention the steering wheel and everything else.
I've not had it to the Hyundai dealership as it's a 1.5 hour drive to one and a 2.75 hour drive to where we bought it. I've gone to our local automotive shop only.
I have now found out that ALL four of the tires are bad.
Has anyone else had any issues with their Elantra factory-issued tires wearing out like this. I do drive it approx. 75 miles round trip weekdays for work. 90% of the time, that means 4 miles of gravel road, unless I go the town route, and then it's only 1 mile of gravel.
Should tires REALLY wear out this fast? No, I have not had an alignment. Just rotated. I'm just disappointed with the performance.
Thank You.
Why don't you post your avg MPH? You're probably driving more city conditions than you realize.
Again, filling with 100% gasoline, calculated mpg was 43.
With past use of 100% gasoline with 3 vehicles(which raised mpg by 8+%, 7%, & 5%), I expect to average near the highway EPA estimate & seldom be near the city EPA mark.
EPA mpg determinations are run using the equivalent of 100% gasoline with no ethanol added.
100% gasoline is sold in 6500 stations in the U.S. & Canada, but often not available in larger cities. Ethanol is often said to reduce pollutants of one particular substance. However, I think the EPA is strongly influenced to demand 10% ethanol blends, by strong lobbying of the ethanol industry, who also rely on the supposed pollutant decrease with the use of 10% ethanol blends.
On outbound leg, temps were 60-70 F so no A/C needed. Dry roads, little wind. Terrain was gently rolling with a few bigger hills for the first half, pretty flat for the 2nd half. With some city driving up front, FE after 250 miles was 42.2 mpg per the computer. After a day of in-town driving, FE dropped to 41.0 and then I started home. For the first two hours, I drove in heavy rain, which I expect sapped some FE (but also cooled things off enough to where I didn't need A/C). 90 miles from home, I had to stop to refuel (myself and the car). FE at that point was 41.0 for the entire trip per the computer, and extremely close to the FE per the pump (41.2 mpg). Filling the Elantra reset the FE meter but the number for the last 90 miles, in light rain and 73 mph cruise, was 43.8 mpg.
More confirmation that the Elantra is capable of meeting or even exceeding its EPA highway FE numbers when driven moderately and when conditions are favorable. I didn't have to deal with any traffic tie-ups from road construction etc., which can kill FE.
(BTW all the gas used had 10% ethanol.)
For years I was spoiled with a CVT transmission, which used nearly an infinite number of 'gearings' for all my hill climbing.
I'd hope so!
I was surprised that on my 500 mile trip with some good-sized hills, the car never down-shifted on the hills. I don't know if having Active Eco on had anything to do with that. I did notice a little drop in FE on the steeper hills, but the car seemed to make up for it going downhill.
Driving several hundred miles in comfort, with the cruise control on, is more important to me than wringing every last mpg out of a car. I'm quite happy with what I was able to get on the Elantra just by setting the cruise near the speed limit and using a light foot when driving in town.
I have a CVT now in my Sentra, and I don't feel "spoiled" by it as it's not very responsive to inputs. But I do appreciate how it keeps revs very low, e.g. around 2000 rpm at 70 mph. That helps keep engine noise down on the highway and helps FE.
Anyway, was reading an article that stated dash mpg displays were THE MOST ACCURATE measure of fuel economy. His reasoning rested on the fact that no two fuel pumps add fuel the same, temperature changes vary how much fuel can be added and "operator technique" was too unpredictable.
He also contended that the computer "really knows" how much gas you are using because it takes into account all factors, many of which the driver is not aware of or can account for.
Anyone else hear something such as this? I have always trusted my own fuel calculations more than the mpg display, but according to this author, I am wrong.
If he is correct, I am getting fabulous mileage. Even if my calculations are correct, while I am getting less than published (of course, I am going faster), my mpg is still very good.
My display is very consistently about 2 mpg too optimistic.
I was surprised that on my 500 mile trip with some good-sized hills, the car never down-shifted on the hills. I don't know if having Active Eco on had anything to do with that. I did notice a little drop in FE on the steeper hills, but the car seemed to make up for it going downhill.
I have a CVT now in my Sentra, and I don't feel "spoiled" by it as it's not very responsive to inputs.
////////////
litesong wrote:
You get good mpg with 10% ethanol. After switching to 100% gasoline, my 3 cars increased their mpg by 8%, 7%, & 5%. Other Elantra drivers have told me their cruise control while using the ECO button can hold sixth gear as low as 40mph, maybe a trace lower. Using 100% gasoline & the ECO button, my tranny holds 6th gear down to 36mph, possibly to 35mph(GPS reading). Not sure that is an advantage..... probably not. On back country roads where I'm using lower gears other than 6th, quite a bit on slower roads, the trip computer(initializing mpg readings), shows that mpg can build readily beyond 45mpg. I always thought highest mpg would be obtained with car in 6th gear, but traveling fairly slowly. But traveling 30-35mph in 4th gear, say can pile up mpg also.
I suspect your extra speed, rpms & extra torque, kept your tranny from shifting from 6th to 5th. Hills don't have to be steep at all, while traveling at less than 60mph to cause the auto tranny to shift down. & encountering any slight elevation while traveling at 40mph in 6th gear causes the tranny to shift down. As stated above tho, I'm not sure shifting to 5th gear loses too many mpg, just so you don't get panicked, & accelerate to get your tranny back into 6th gear.
I had the Nissan CVT in a Dodge Caliber. Loved it, except for the computer controlled slow response at slow speed, you mentioned. However, the response got quicker at faster speeds. I did love the elegant motion of the CVT & it did cause the inefficient car body & engine to be more fuel efficient & accelerate quicker at higher speeds, despite the overall lethargy of the body & engine. I got as high as 37mpg with the car rated only at 27mpg on the highway & averaged 31mpg. Tho the Elantra auto tranny pleases me, the smoothness of the CVT can't be beat. I have heard that the new CVT in the 2013 Honda Accord has licked the lack of response lag, & powers up quickly when asked.
The Elantra was the first car I ever owned that seemed to require pampering to achieve even DECENT fuel economy. I don't have patience or time for that. I hope my Elantra is now happily in the driveway of someone with an appreciation and fondness for such shenanigans. I'm far happier with my more-efficient (for my driving routes and style) Accord.
I don't consider setting the cruise control at the speed limit, maybe a bit over, and driving down the highway to get over the EPA rating "pampering". But everyone has different expectations. As for me, I've had no problem getting near 40 mpg on the Elantra at 75 mph on the highway.
I own one CVT car now (Sentra) and it requires a LOT of "pampering" IMO to get good FE. But with a light touch on the gas, the revs stay low and it does well on FE.
Unfortunately, everywhere I drive involves cresting some kind of hill (I'm in the lowest part of Redmond, WA, and everything is uphill). Consequently, in city driving, I'm blessed if I can keep the mileage above 20 mpg (22 mpg indicated).
/////////
litesong wrote:
Just got my Elantra(Epsilon Lyrae) a month ago & drive some of the same routes as you, also living in a valley, needing to climb hills often. The I-405 South from Lynnwood area rises & falls from sub-100 feet to 500feet. As for your short 12 mile, trip computer read 43mpg, I got the same 43 mpg, but on a roundtrip to Bellingham from Everett, with 3 people, 3.5 hours of multiple cool downs, & some city driving. Later tanks of gas have gotten 40mpg again, kicked me 400 miles down the road repeatedly with as much as 3.3 gallons remaining at fill-up, & Epsilon Lyrae is averaging 38+mpg.
If your odometer is like many Elantra owners, the odometer reads low 3+%, which picks up 1mpg at 33mpg. Depending on where you live, get 100% gasoline(non-ethanol) in your Elantra. My last 3 cars increased their mpg by 8%,7%, & 5%, switching to 100% gasoline. Be thinking for good mpg. You have to learn how to handle the hills. Handling the hills properly will NOT raise your mpg, but keep you from losing so many mpg on the hills.
Liked the Elantra better than I thought I would but it was pretty gutless and also pretty noisy on hard acceleration. Radio was actually decent and it tracked well on the expressway. Seat wasn't overly comfortable or uncomfortable. However, any seat will cause aches after 13 or 14 hours. The suspension was good except any kind of big bump really shook the car and resulted in a lot of booming. Overall, good experience and good MPG. Last year I rented a 2012 Altima that averaged 32.1mpg for the entire trip. However, last year was about 95% hwy as I drove my Dad's car a lot while visiting.