Around 60 MPH on a level interstate , the sedona RPM with the 5 speed tranny drops under 1500 RPM. this generates very favorable MPG for as long as the road stays that way. this kicks up the MPG for some people.
everyone else driving faster , with traffic and such , and mountains , they suffer.
Pardon my delay in replying - I've been cruising and burning gas the last 4 days.
Re my ethanol link, please note that it was from a pro-ethanol group. Anti's would have made it sound worse. Better to increase CAFE than rely on bio-fuels for any relief, energy or environmental, imho.
And Smulvey, I'm in a big farm state. A friend of mine grew up in a small farm town around here and wonders why his neighbors get subsidized when his family's small hardware store had to sink or swim on its own (it sank).
Ah well, interesting stuff, but getting a bit too far off-topic for Town Hall.
btw, got lousy mileage over the weekend - driving ~200 miles on one lane rocky gravel roads with lots of 10%+ grades doesn't help mpg.
Before I replied to your comments, I wanted to check my data to make sure that I had the proper conversion. I guess you planted a seed of doubt. That said, the mileage I posted is converted to US gallons, so the mileage is right at 25.5 highway, and 21 city. You need to give us northern neighbours some credit :-)
Assuming that all your conversions are correct, then you have the best MPGs of all the Sedona postings that I can recall.
I am wondering if there is something unique to your driving that gets you these results. What is your octane rating, what are your normal driving speeds, and what sorta terrain are you dealing with - flat, hilly, etc.
I questioned the math of the NASA guru's as well, so don't feel bad.
It just seemed odd that you were getting 20% better mileage than most and the difference in the size of the two gallons was also 20%
So tell us, where did you get the four space saver spares pumped up to 80PSI that you are driving on, LOL
I posted a 31MPG ONCE in my 1987 LeSabre. Springtime, all highway, 55MPH, no A/C. However, the long term average over 75K miles was 23.1, for what it is worth.
I don't know much about this topic...maybe these comments are sort of "random" so take them from the perspective of one person trying to determine what to look into if his highway mileage was so...unexpected.
first off there's this assertion that cars get better MPG after they've broken in? is that true? why, because of piston/ring clearences or something? would it account for say 8-10 or more MPG? that seems such a significant chunk of the rated highway MPG to begin with.
if my van fell into the pool of poor highway MPG, i'd be looking to determine if:
a). my tranny was shifting up through all the gears and if the overdrive was working properly...i think you could assess that by looking at the RPMs as the unit upshifted and you got to steady-state speed. is there a chance that a torque convertor solenoid isn't working properly or the van isn't shifting into the highest gear?
b). any brake problem...i'd jack up the car and see if each wheel had any significant resistance to being free spun
c). i'd check my tire pressure per the label on the door column
d). i'd check the engine air filter element
if after a, b, c, and d: i found nothing (and i'm outside of my league here) then i'd consider taking it to a mechanic (maybe an independant one; specially if my dealer said "nothings wrong" since poor MPG seems to me, something is wrong) to determine if:
e). any of the cylinders were running rich... can't you determine that by looking at the plug condition? someone told me there is a device (colour tune - a sparkplug replacement??) which will visually help determine this by color; however i've also been told maybe the deposits on the plug is enough to assess this...there are pix in one of those Chilton manuals...
f). the catalyltic (sp?) convertor. i'm told if there is something wrong, this could lead to poor engine performance / mileage
g). any cylinder was deficient in compression
h). timing belt problem
if after these, and nothing turned up, i'd still be wondering if the programming of the fuel or the transmission was out of wack...maybe this is only possible to determine at the dealer.
i guess i'd be writing the manufacturer, specially if my highway mileage wasn't constantly improving as others have suggested will happen. i would not be content.
doesn't it seem logical that these things should get checked, and that some of them can be done without significant investment?
With 183,700 miles...recent trip of approx. 1300 miles from S. Cal. to Stockton, Ca, thence to Mammoth Lakes and return home...70/75mph, a/c always on, mid-80's.
Got 21.7mpg. Previa has been an almost perfect van. Am waiting to replace w/Sienna in a year or so when Prev has well over 200K miles on its carcass. I love that van...owned since original from Longo Toyota. I have changed its oil every 3k w/filter. Use 87 gas wherever is cheapest.
I couldn't resist listing our Previa's stuff...after reading some good posts about non-Toyota vehicles on this thread. I've owned Hondas and Toyotas for past 18 years and am totally sold on them. Just happens Toyota is a tad out front at the moment. Who knows, maybe Honda Ody will come out w/new model that is quiet on the road...that will present a welcome quandry.
Just purchased this van which is getting much better gas mileage than our previous van - 93 Aerostar.
Combined city/hwy ,mileage seems to have settled in around 19 mpg. Out on a level hwy mileage averages around 24-25. Not bad for a big van with the 3.8L V6. Our old Ford averaged around 17-18 city/hwy, 21 hwy when empty, 16.5 on long trips with 4 kids & luggage. Recently took the T&C on a weekend trip to Western PA and averaged 17.5 over hilly terrain with a full load. Not bad in my book.
Regular unleaded fuel (87 octane) on mixed terrain (some hills but nothing serious). Last highway trip, mostly using cruise on highway set at 125 km\hr (about 75 mph), using AC for approx. half the trip. Should note that the posted 25.5 mpg on highway was technically not all highway, since I had about 50 miles on full tank prior to hitting highway.
I have kept fuelling records since new, and it seems very consistent, save for the first few tankfulls, where I was getting 18 mpg in the city (now around the 21 mark).
I don't think I am doing anything different than others, perhaps just lucky. I am surprised by your statement
"you have the best MPGs of all the Sedona postings that I can recall"
I may not have the proper information, but isn't the Sedona rated for that type of mileage?
U.S. EPA estimates 15 city - 20 highway for the Sedona. Once broken in , most are reporting 16-17 city and 21-23 highway. Your 21-25.5 is pretty unique - that is why tboner was questioning your computations, and if they are correct, then the question is raised whether you are doing something unique in your driving.
I get about 18-19 mpgs in mixed driving. With 6 people and luggage in the van and 80 mph cruising, I get about 23 mpgs. A 4 speed tranny in my van would help fuel economy significantly, but I am glad that I have the 3 speed because I've heard that the reliability of Chrysler's 4-speed is very bad.
Did a Dallas - Colorado trip. Averaged 25 MPG on Quest 97 with 67K on it. Average speed was over 80MPH for sure. AC was on all time. Used TEXACO first time and may be this was the trick. Engine and Transmission are both on Sinthetic (Mobil-1) for long time.
I'm jealous reading about all the vans getting into the 20's with mpg. My new '03 Sienna with close to 5000 miles has yet to best 21 mpg on a primarily highway trip with a lite load. My old Eagle Summit AWD wagon regularly got 20 mpg. I was hoping for a step up with the Sienna. It sees moslty city duty and some 45-50 mph zones in town, so 19-20 is the norm for me. I took my father-in-law's Buick Century (1 year old, 3.something-6cyl. I believe) down to Arkansas and got an average of 33mpg loaded up. That's what I want. Jimmy in Milwaukee
you will notice the dealer lets you go with a tire pressure of 30 PSI or less.
the factory says you can go to 35 PSI.
the tires from Kumho are rated to 44 PSI.
you may improve milage by going to a higer pressure.
I run mine high, insanely high to hear some people say, at 44 PSI.
Since I checked with Kumho and they say it is OK I am leaving them there.
So far, with 20,000 miles on them they are wearing very evenly accros the face of the tread.
The handling is good and the milage is very good on trips.
The ride is " harsh" compared to a softer tire, but the wheelbase is so long that I really do not notice it.
Many on these boards have been very critical of my pressure since they have the notion that tires will " explode" at 44 PSI, but actually there are many pickup truck tires that are intended for high pressure , even a Ford Econoline E350 comes STANDARD from Ford with tires that are rated for 80 PSI in back in 50 PSI in front. This is the 15 passenger airport van, which I rented for a church group this summer. Hey guess what? Even though these vans are notorious for ROLLING OVER and KILLING the passengers- the dealer had the WRONG TIRE PRESSURE in it. he had 80 lbs in the front and 50 lbs in the back- the complete opposite of what is needed! Ha Ha - so much for the great Ford Truck professionals at Genesse Ford Truck.
Truck tires are different than car tires. Typically truck tires are available with more plies, since they are made to carry more weight, with correspondingly higher tire pressure. For example, the E-350 GVWR is ~9,000 vs ~6,000 pounds for your Sedona.
A common complaint around Town Hall is incorrect tire pressure upon delivery of a new car. The dealer prep is supposed to include adjusting the pressure but it's often wrong. Best is to check them yourself, say first thing every Saturday morning when they are cold. Check Tire gauges for brand suggestions.
Liking the tire pressure gauges on my new 2004 Quest...push a button and check the pressure. Definitely agree that you cannot compare truck tires to car tires in terms of PSI. I wouldn't personally run a tire at 44 PSI, especially in bad weather, but as long as you are within Khumo's specs in relation to the vehicle you can do what you want. I'd rather have an inherently stiffer sidewall (H or V rated tires) than to run pressures that high.
Getting about 19 mpg around town on the first two tanks, haven't done an extended highway drive as only 500 miles on the odometer.
Rented a (almost) new 04 Sienna LE for a 2 weeks trip, where we drove 1,900 miles across the Canadian Rockies. • Regular unleaded. • Lots of highways and secondary roads, lots of hills(!!!). • Vehicle was loaded with 5 adults, camping gear and luggage almost up to the roof. • The A/C was on all the time. The end result: 21 miles per gallon (11,2 liters per 100km). Not bad, considering the load, the terrain ... and the way I drive!
BTW, I normally drive sedans. I was impressed by the overall handling of this "truck".
One thing you have to remember about the pressure in your tires is they increase as you are driving. As much as 5-6 psi. So if you are filling your tires to 44 cold they could get as high at 50 psi as you're driving which is above the rating by Kumho
Not sure the "benefits" you get from having the tires inflated that high is worth it. If you are outside the specified limits and something were to happen like a blowout, I highly doubt you would have any recourse with the car or tire manufacturer. BTW, you should check with the car manufacturer to see what they say. I bet they have a different story.
RE rental dealership with wrong pressures...seems like they probably rotated the tires front to back without changing the pressures. Not an excuse for them, IVO negative consequences, but certainly a fact that happens.
most of the time you will see that the manufacturer states the maximum COLD inflation pressure.
This is because they know the tire will warm up and the pressure will increase.
I have noticed a zero to 5 PSI increase when the tires heat up.
I also notice that the increase stays at 5 PSI even after 2 hours of interstate driving.
All this will become a moot point in a year.
I understand that ALL tires are about to be re-designed to run on LOW pressure, and the new government guidlines will eliminate the idea of a high pressure , fuel efficient passenger car tire.
The new tires will all be low pressure, stiff sidewall style.
I assume they will be heavy and absorb more energy, so they will reduce fuel milage.
This is in response to the people who live in warm climates , dirve at 80 MPH and run their SUV tires on low pressure.
I'm getting around 20MPG in city commute mostly in 30-50 speed limit. And during my three road trips I got around 24MPG (80-90 miles/hr). I've right now 3700 miles on my Ody and it is 8 weeks old.
Did you get lower mileage on your first few tank fulls? My first tank full we got 17mpg on 100% city driving. Did you notice an incresae after 2-3,000 miles? Thanks
conditions: 100% western interstate 50% mountains / 50% flat 80 % Cruise Control minimal load ( 500 lbs) 50% Air Conditioning
tires- 44 PSI oil-mobil 1 5-50W synthetic transsmission oil- changed at 26000 miles, Kia spec diamond 3 fluid. air filter- new trip - 800 miles over 2 days
With 22,000 miles on the van the last tank around town was 16.4 mpg & last trip was 21.0 (70 MPH). Has been about the same since new. My 93 Aerostar with 217,000 miles gets 20 in town & 23 on the same trips.
Owned it for 18 months....no longer have it which is another story but I bought it for the suggested mpg on the window sticker of 19/24. Kept a little notebook in the glove box to record milage after every tank (as I always have and still do). Over a year and a half and 19k miles averaged mid 16's around town (premium per the book). Highway average low 20's driving mostly 80mph. Not bad considering it was a 4500lb vehicle with 210hp, but a long way from 19/24.
I now have an 02 Tahoe. My big gas guzzler consistently averages high 14's mpg around town and 18+ highway driving same/same. I put regular fuel in my Chevy instead of premium in the Sienna. The Toyota might appear more fuel efficient but a wash moneywise if you factor in premium vs regular fuel $. There ain't no magic. Pushing 2 tons around with satisfying acceleration takes fuel. Weight + power + driving style = mpg. Pound for pound my Chevy does just about as well as my x-Sienna. Not sure why Toyota gets to post an mpg 20% better than real world while my Tahoe does 10% better than it's window sticker and takes a beating for being an gas hog. Love my Tahoe!
If some vans require premium gas then their better mpg loses some of it's edge compared to vans using regular gas. Equally important to me is drive train longevity. A timing chain is better, to me, than a belt. Are 4 cams less reliable than pushrods? And are the variable timing engines as durable as the non-variable? Would Mazda's engine last longer than Toyota's or Honda's and require less maintenance?
Steve........who's pulling these guy's chains? Mandating less fuel-efficient tires and coming out with reports saying don't make cars lighter 'cause you'll make them less safe....seems like they're playing right into the hands of the Big 3.
Fuel Economy #'s.......it's encouraging to see the good #'s the MPV is getting....EPA-rated less than Sienna/Odyssey but real world...a bit better. Plus it uses regular fuel, unlike the new Sienna.
On a 1200 mile trip this summer to KY I got 25.5 mpg averaging 75 mph. Over 60000 miles I have averaged 20 mpg. Pretty good for such a large, powerful minivan. Happy motoring.
Just returned from a 1700 mile adventure from Orlando to the Smoky Mountains in Tennessee. My 2003 MPV got anywhere from 24 to 26 MPG it seemed on the highway (that's up and down the mountains). Around town here in O'town, it gets 20 to 21 with the air usually on. Overall, quite satisfied with the MPG, and van overall. Definitely no regrets buying it last Halloween.
I'm sure no one at the NHTSA has any agenda other than in their legislative mandate.
:-)
I'm traveling in the South this week (including passing through Knoxville, but bypassed the Smokies) and gas is about 15 to 20 cents cheaper than in Boise, and it's gone down .15 cents at home since August. At this rate we'll have to archive this discussion soon since no one will care what the mpg is.
Comments
everyone else driving faster , with traffic and such , and mountains , they suffer.
Re my ethanol link, please note that it was from a pro-ethanol group. Anti's would have made it sound worse. Better to increase CAFE than rely on bio-fuels for any relief, energy or environmental, imho.
And Smulvey, I'm in a big farm state. A friend of mine grew up in a small farm town around here and wonders why his neighbors get subsidized when his family's small hardware store had to sink or swim on its own (it sank).
Ah well, interesting stuff, but getting a bit too far off-topic for Town Hall.
btw, got lousy mileage over the weekend - driving ~200 miles on one lane rocky gravel roads with lots of 10%+ grades doesn't help mpg.
Steve, Host
I am wondering if there is something unique to your driving that gets you these results. What is your octane rating, what are your normal driving speeds, and what sorta terrain are you dealing with - flat, hilly, etc.
Continued good driving.
It just seemed odd that you were getting 20% better mileage than most and the difference in the size of the two gallons was also 20%
So tell us, where did you get the four space saver spares pumped up to 80PSI that you are driving on, LOL
I posted a 31MPG ONCE in my 1987 LeSabre. Springtime, all highway, 55MPH, no A/C. However, the long term average over 75K miles was 23.1, for what it is worth.
TB
first off there's this assertion that cars get better MPG after they've broken in? is that true? why, because of piston/ring clearences or something? would it account for say 8-10 or more MPG? that seems such a significant chunk of the rated highway MPG to begin with.
if my van fell into the pool of poor highway MPG, i'd be looking to determine if:
a). my tranny was shifting up through all the gears and if the overdrive was working properly...i think you could assess that by looking at the RPMs as the unit upshifted and you got to steady-state speed. is there a chance that a torque convertor solenoid isn't working properly or the van isn't shifting into the highest gear?
b). any brake problem...i'd jack up the car and see if each wheel had any significant resistance to being free spun
c). i'd check my tire pressure per the label on the door column
d). i'd check the engine air filter element
if after a, b, c, and d: i found nothing (and i'm outside of my league here) then i'd consider taking it to a mechanic (maybe an independant one; specially if my dealer said "nothings wrong" since poor MPG seems to me, something is wrong) to determine if:
e). any of the cylinders were running rich... can't you determine that by looking at the plug condition? someone told me there is a device (colour tune - a sparkplug replacement??) which will visually help determine this by color; however i've also been told maybe the deposits on the plug is enough to assess this...there are pix in one of those Chilton manuals...
f). the catalyltic (sp?) convertor. i'm told if there is something wrong, this could lead to poor engine performance / mileage
g). any cylinder was deficient in compression
h). timing belt problem
if after these, and nothing turned up, i'd still be wondering if the programming of the fuel or the transmission was out of wack...maybe this is only possible to determine at the dealer.
i guess i'd be writing the manufacturer, specially if my highway mileage wasn't constantly improving as others have suggested will happen. i would not be content.
doesn't it seem logical that these things should get checked, and that some of them can be done without significant investment?
for what it's worth.
Got 21.7mpg. Previa has been an almost perfect van. Am waiting to replace w/Sienna in a year or so when Prev has well over 200K miles on its carcass. I love that van...owned since original from Longo Toyota. I have changed its oil every 3k w/filter. Use 87 gas wherever is cheapest.
Today's Vans Don't Compare to Previa
Oh, nevermind. You were a regular in there :-)
Steve, Host
Combined city/hwy ,mileage seems to have settled in around 19 mpg. Out on a level hwy mileage averages around 24-25. Not bad for a big van with the 3.8L V6. Our old Ford averaged around 17-18 city/hwy, 21 hwy when empty, 16.5 on long trips with 4 kids & luggage. Recently took the T&C on a weekend trip to Western PA and averaged 17.5 over hilly terrain with a full load. Not bad in my book.
I have kept fuelling records since new, and it seems very consistent, save for the first few tankfulls, where I was getting 18 mpg in the city (now around the 21 mark).
I don't think I am doing anything different than others, perhaps just lucky. I am surprised by your statement
"you have the best MPGs of all the Sedona postings that I can recall"
I may not have the proper information, but isn't the Sedona rated for that type of mileage?
Much of the time with the AC on or slightly higer speeds , miles drops to 23-25 MPG.
5250 miles van fully loaded
Overall avg: 21mpg combined city/Interstate driving
On non-mountainous Interstate 24mpg @ 70+mph.
In mountains: 17mpg
Definately makes a difference in stop/go traffic around the city. Van is great on the Interstate.
Quest 97 with 67K on it. Average speed was over
80MPH for sure. AC was on all time. Used TEXACO first time and may be this was the trick.
Engine and Transmission are both on Sinthetic (Mobil-1) for long time.
I took my father-in-law's Buick Century (1 year old, 3.something-6cyl. I believe) down to Arkansas and got an average of 33mpg loaded up. That's what I want.
Jimmy in Milwaukee
Oh well, the kids like the TV\VCR
Rest of fill ups on trip with more AC and more hills averaged 26 mpg the rest of the trip.
Lowest mileage was 24mpg on one tank mostly driven at 80MPH.
Mobil 5-30 synthetic, K&N filter both installed just before trip. Tire pressure kept at 38 psi.
Oil looked really clean at end of the trip.
Back home I average 22 with a mix of 60% highway 30% city and 10% gravel roads.
Not bad since I only have 2000 miles on the odometer. I'm hoping the gas mileage will improve as the car breaks in.
I use a brand name gas (Amoco, Exxon) and usually put in 87 octane.
the factory says you can go to 35 PSI.
the tires from Kumho are rated to 44 PSI.
you may improve milage by going to a higer pressure.
I run mine high, insanely high to hear some people say, at 44 PSI.
Since I checked with Kumho and they say it is OK I am leaving them there.
So far, with 20,000 miles on them they are wearing very evenly accros the face of the tread.
The handling is good and the milage is very good on trips.
The ride is " harsh" compared to a softer tire, but the wheelbase is so long that I really do not notice it.
Many on these boards have been very critical of my pressure since they have the notion that tires will " explode" at 44 PSI, but actually there are many pickup truck tires that are intended for high pressure , even a Ford Econoline E350 comes STANDARD from Ford with tires that are rated for 80 PSI in back in 50 PSI in front. This is the 15 passenger airport van, which I rented for a church group this summer. Hey guess what? Even though these vans are notorious for ROLLING OVER and KILLING the passengers- the dealer had the WRONG TIRE PRESSURE in it. he had 80 lbs in the front and 50 lbs in the back- the complete opposite of what is needed! Ha Ha - so much for the great Ford Truck professionals at Genesse Ford Truck.
A common complaint around Town Hall is incorrect tire pressure upon delivery of a new car. The dealer prep is supposed to include adjusting the pressure but it's often wrong. Best is to check them yourself, say first thing every Saturday morning when they are cold. Check Tire gauges for brand suggestions.
Steve, Host
Getting about 19 mpg around town on the first two tanks, haven't done an extended highway drive as only 500 miles on the odometer.
Nay
• Regular unleaded.
• Lots of highways and secondary roads, lots of hills(!!!).
• Vehicle was loaded with 5 adults, camping gear and luggage almost up to the roof.
• The A/C was on all the time.
The end result: 21 miles per gallon (11,2 liters per 100km). Not bad, considering the load, the terrain ... and the way I drive!
BTW, I normally drive sedans. I was impressed by the overall handling of this "truck".
Not sure the "benefits" you get from having the tires inflated that high is worth it. If you are outside the specified limits and something were to happen like a blowout, I highly doubt you would have any recourse with the car or tire manufacturer. BTW, you should check with the car manufacturer to see what they say. I bet they have a different story.
This is because they know the tire will warm up and the pressure will increase.
I have noticed a zero to 5 PSI increase when the tires heat up.
I also notice that the increase stays at 5 PSI even after 2 hours of interstate driving.
All this will become a moot point in a year.
I understand that ALL tires are about to be re-designed to run on LOW pressure, and the new government guidlines will eliminate the idea of a high pressure , fuel efficient passenger car tire.
The new tires will all be low pressure, stiff sidewall style.
I assume they will be heavy and absorb more energy, so they will reduce fuel milage.
This is in response to the people who live in warm climates , dirve at 80 MPH and run their SUV tires on low pressure.
So we all win ,due to their shortcomings, right ?
The only recent tire news I've seen is the recent story about the NHTSA rewriting the tire pressure monitor regulations.
Steve, Host
MJ
NHTSA
His comments about lower mpg are right on; we're looking at stiffer sideways in the near future, meaning heavier tires, and worse mpg.
Steve, Host
Thanks
conditions:
100% western interstate
50% mountains / 50% flat
80 % Cruise Control
minimal load ( 500 lbs)
50% Air Conditioning
tires- 44 PSI
oil-mobil 1 5-50W synthetic
transsmission oil- changed at 26000 miles, Kia spec diamond 3 fluid.
air filter- new
trip - 800 miles over 2 days
Can't complain considering the substantial engine power loss on a trip largely above 8,000 ft altitude with two major passes above 10,500 ft.
Nay
Around town we get a pretty consistent 21 MPG
Frankly, considering all of the abuse the MPV has taken on gas mileage, I have to say I'm extremely pleased.
Leslie
25 highway
19 local between I-90 and Speculator. Lots of ups/downs and turns.
City 24
There ain't no magic. Pushing 2 tons around with satisfying acceleration takes fuel. Weight + power + driving style = mpg. Pound for pound my Chevy does just about as well as my x-Sienna. Not sure why Toyota gets to post an mpg 20% better than real world while my Tahoe does 10% better than it's window sticker and takes a beating for being an gas hog. Love my Tahoe!
Regular highway driving is 25 to 27 mpg and around town is 22 mpg.
Loaded up with kids, dogs, camping gear and kayaks on the roof we got 22 mpg on our summer vacation.
On the highway I drive 60 to 70 mph and do not have a lead foot. Gas is brand name 87 octane.
Mandating less fuel-efficient tires and coming out with reports saying don't make cars lighter 'cause you'll make them less safe....seems like they're playing right into the hands of the Big 3.
Fuel Economy #'s.......it's encouraging to see the good #'s the MPV is getting....EPA-rated less than Sienna/Odyssey but real world...a bit better.
Plus it uses regular fuel, unlike the new Sienna.
:-)
I'm traveling in the South this week (including passing through Knoxville, but bypassed the Smokies) and gas is about 15 to 20 cents cheaper than in Boise, and it's gone down .15 cents at home since August. At this rate we'll have to archive this discussion soon since no one will care what the mpg is.
Steve, Host