Howdy, Stranger!

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





Howdy, Stranger!

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

Are you in the market for a new car and having a hard time finding affordable options? A reporter would like to speak with you; please reach out to [email protected] by 2/26 for more details.

Kia Forte Real World MPG

jim1977jim1977 Posts: 14
edited June 2017 in Kia
I just took my Forte EX with the fuel economy package out on my first trip to central PA. It was about 75% highway driving not exceeding the speed limits, 20% secondary roads at 30-45 mph with a lot of hills and twists, and maybe 5% city driving, for a total of about 420 miles on my first measured tank. There was a lot of downshifting on the secondary roads. I had the A/C on most of the time, if only for the defogger, since we had a couple of days of moderate to heavy rain which probably doesn't help the mileage.

I got 34.4 mpg, which seems reasonable enough for now. The car only has 650 miles on it total. From what I read of the earlier Kia 2.0 L engine on the Spectra, it takes a long time, maybe 10k-20k miles, to break in properly. Whether that holds true on the new Theta II engine remains to be seen.
«1

Comments

  • timmer23timmer23 Posts: 24
    Three weeks ago I drove a Kia Forte EX with 5550 miles on the odometer as a rental car from Hertz 1850 miles round trip from Georgia to Pennsylvania. In addition to me driving, there was one adult passenger and the back seats as well as the trunk were packed full of camping gear, loaded coolers, and clothing for the weekend. Driving roughly 10 miles over the speed limit on the highway with the A/C on the entire time, I calculated 35 MPG.
  • And I just filled up for the fourth time after 463 miles. I got 38.3 mpg, but the driving was mainly easy highways at 55 to 65 mph, with about 30 miles of in-town driving. It seems that the Forte engine is getting broken in, with about 2000 miles on it now.
  • After first month avg mpg at 70 is about 33, 65-34, 60-35... I did get 39 mpg stuck in 45 mph traffic. This is all highway with minimal stops. Driving style non-agressive...which is hard to do in this car.
  • jimpimmsjimpimms Pittsfield MAPosts: 81
    edited February 2010
    The published EPA city/hwy numbers are 25/34. 80% of my driving is local, in the city, with an occasional hop to destinations 35-50 miles away. It's been averaging about 25.5 mpg in the first 2800 miles. Petrol here in Mass. is E10, so I expect to get an mpg or two less than with unadulterated gasoline. I topped off the tank before an expected trip yesterday, getting only 20.5 mpg; it was all city driving, and a good bit of idling, but disappointing nonetheless. When I returned from my trip of 215 miles (90% parkway at 60 mph average), I immediately refueled. The results? A stellar 38.5 mpg.
  • That is a good point about the E10. I got 42 mpg on a trip through Ohio on the Interstates with no E10, then got about 35 to 36 mpg on similar driving through Kentucky with E10. I hope the government takes that loss into account when they do their figures. Even better would be to drop E10 entirely, since it doesn't save much oil, considering all the energy it takes to produce it.
  • My last 3 fill-ups were in the 34 mpg range doing 20 city 80 highway on north east winter gas, our forte has 3500 mile on it in less then two months.
  • jimpimmsjimpimms Pittsfield MAPosts: 81
    I just returned from a trip to western New York State, a total of 663 miles, with a passenger and a trunk full of luggage. 5% was in city traffic, 10% on 55 mph secondary roads, and 85% on the NYS Thruway (I-90), where the cruise control was set at 72-73 mph (which I infrequently exceeded). My overall mileage was 33.8 mpg. :)
  • jimpimmsjimpimms Pittsfield MAPosts: 81
    I just returned from a trip to the Towson, MD area, from western Mass. The trip, each way, was 377 miles, virtually all of it Interstates (or equivalent). For the majority of the trip, cruise control was set at 72-73 mph. There was also 171 miles of local driving, for a total of 925 miles. My Forte EX returned 34.1 mpg on the way down, with the a/c always on. In local driving (a good mix of city, suburban, hilly rural, and highway), I got 27.5 mpg, again with the a/c constantly on. On the return trip, with almost no a/c use (sunroof tilted, driver's window down 1-1/2", and right rear passenger's window down 1-1/2"), it returned 34.6 mpg. The overall trip mpg was 32.8. The return trip was made in 5 hr 40 min (no stops), for an average speed of 66.5 mph.
  • lcw1lcw1 Posts: 36
    The 2.4 L on the Optima is listed as producing 24/35 MPG while the Forte SX 2.4 L produces
    23/ 32. Not nitpicking but trying to understand.
  • jimpimmsjimpimms Pittsfield MAPosts: 81
    The Optima's 2.4-L engine has direct injection (GDI), which makes it more efficient, both in fuel economy and horsepower.
  • lcw1lcw1 Posts: 36
    Thanks! That helps.
  • compensatecompensate Posts: 212
    edited April 2011
    I bought a 2011 Kia Forte 5-door with a 6-speed manual transmission to replace my 2001 Hyundai Elantra GT (250,000 miles on it).

    On my first tank of gas (dealer filled tank before I left), I got 33.5 mpg. This consisted of about 10% stop-and-go city driving, 10% interstate highway cruising in rolling hills at about 75 mph, and 80% on back highways with lots of rolling hills (a few steep hills) at about 65 mph most of the time. I am also still learning to get the feel of this clutch, as I tend to over-rev a bit here and there. Also the gas is 10% ethanol and temps have ranged from 40 degrees (early morning drives) to 90 degrees (record high temp one day).

    I'll try to post more mileage as I get the car slowly broken-in.
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Alamogordo, NMPosts: 7,615
    congratulations on the new Kia Forte sedan. Pop some pics in here if possible so we can see it. Kia is ever-impressive when compared to the rest of the automakers. I put the Germans as the most expensive cars that are really over-hyped, over-priced and utterly not worth even talking about.

    But the South Koreans are the sharpest tacks out there if you take Mitsubishi of Japan out of the picture. Both Kia and Mitsubishi will make you a vehicle you can be proud of and that will last. Good gas mileage on your Forte there-nice to see you bought a manual tranny.

    I think you're gonna absolutely love your 2011 Kia Forte sedan! Sounds like you already do!

    2011 Kia Soul Sport 5-speed

  • vtcarguyvtcarguy Posts: 4
    I recently purchased a 2011 Kia Forte 5 Door to replace my 2003 Hyundai Elantra GT with over 185,000 miles.
    The highway mileage with my KIA FORTE 5 door with the 6 speed automatic is absolutely terrible!
    With over 4,000 miles on the best mileage I have gotten is 29.68 miles per gallon compared to a highway estimate of 36mpg. I achieved 29mpg after over 300 miles of highjway driving by never going over 69 mph, using cruise control whenever possible and excelerating as slowly as possible. Typical is 26.5 to 28.5 mpg. My Hyundai always provided me with 31-32 MPG no matter how hard I drove it.
    Is anyone getting poor gas mileage with their Kia?
  • jimpimmsjimpimms Pittsfield MAPosts: 81
    There's obviously something wrong, like a malfunctioning oxygen sensor. Ask the dealer to check for OBD2 codes. With your type of driving, you should be getting highway mileage in the mid to upper-30s.
  • vtcarguyvtcarguy Posts: 4
    Thanks jimpimms! I'll let you know how I make out
  • sschultzsschultz Posts: 1
    Strangely enough I also traded in a 2002 Elantra GT for this inefficient 5 door 2011 forte EX. I'm very disappointed with my gas mileage at 4K - averaging 29-30.5 MPG driving highway 40 miles a day between 50-70mph. Car is already in the shop for some horrendous driver side wheel noises - already regretting this purchase.
  • vtcarguyvtcarguy Posts: 4
    I took my Forte to the Dealer and had them check everything out due to the poor mileage I am getting. "Nothing is wrong!" Kia Customer Assistance told me as long as I get at least the city rating of 26 there is nothing they are willing to do.
    I even went to so far as to talk to the Dealer about trading and then I decided I'm not giving Kia any more $. So if anyone wants to buy a 7 week old Kia with 4,000 miles on it at a substantial discount drop me a line. I headed back to Hyundai!
  • well, I got my 2010 forte EX last December with 1700km (demo??)
    and today, I got 18000KM (12000miles) on it.
    on my last trip of 1400km, I noticed fuel efficiency has increased to 40mpg or 7.1L/100km
    I always carry my tools and parts in my truck that weight about 200Lbs and I drive 110km/h to 120km/h on winter tire 16"
    I would say that before last trip it was giving me around 8.2L/100km
    My conclussion is that the weather can contribute/affect the fuel efficiency by far.
    This last trip the temp was around 7C and week before was around -5 ~-20C in avarage.
    So, hopfully, with the spring time and 4 season tire changes, the fuel comsumption gets better.
    cheers.
    Location
    Calgary, AB

    Gas price: CDN$1.239 / litre
    1CDN $= U$S 1.05
  • compensatecompensate Posts: 212
    First, it is interesting that several of us current Kia Forte5 owners used to own the Elantra GT 5 door. Probably because the newest Elantra 5-door is an ugly, boxy wagon, no longer resembling the true hatchback design of the earlier Elantra GT 5-door.

    I have to agree with others about my 2001 Elantra GT - my gas mileage didn't change a lot, whether I drove it hard (95 mph) or easy (75 pmh). With a 5-speed manual, my Elantra got about 31-32 mpg consistently, even at 250,000 miles!

    On a recent long roadtrip, I drove my 2011 Kia Forte EX a lot more aggressively. I followed a long convoy of speeding cars along I-75 at speed ranging from 85 to 95 mph. I also used the air conditioner. I got 28.5 mpg driving under those conditions. I was expecting to get better highway mileage, even when speeding, especially since each spark plug has its own "coil" unit mounted directly above it.

    I'll keep checking the mileage and see how it changes.
  • jim1977jim1977 Posts: 14
    edited May 2011
    I returned a month ago from a 5000 mile trip from Pennsylvania to Texas in my Forte EX 2010 with the fuel economy package and 5-speed automatic (see the first post). Over mostly Interstates with the usual secondary roads and towns, I averaged 38.9 mpg, driving at the speed limit. The high was 42 mpg, and the low was 33.2 mpg, with some driving in downtown San Antonio, Austin and El Paso.

    A/C was in use maybe half the time. The gas was of course 10% ethanol, and it would have been better mpg without it. I use Mobil I (5W-20) oil, and took a spare quart just in case, but it didn't burn any. I ended up with about 23,000 miles on the car now, and am pleased with it.
  • mml1mml1 Posts: 2
    Gee, you're doing quite well! I get 23-24 in mostly city driving. Have seen as high as 32 on the highway in the wintertime. I got comparable mileage, city and highway, with a 2001 Chevy Impala with the big V-6 engine!

    The Impala had lots of mechanical issues since new; so far the Kia seems to be a better car but I am not impressed with the terrible mileage. Kia oughta be sued for false advertising... if that were possible (not sure it is.)
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    the vehicle depending on the engine is rated by the EPA at 23-26 mpg (US) for the city and 32-36 mpg for the highway. So you are getting what it claims so how can that be terrible mileage?

    Mileage has nothing to do with Kia, all vehicles told in the US are tested to the same standards set by the EPA. So in no way is is false advertising, it always claims you mileage may vary due to a variety of conditions, its simply a guide to judge vehicles as they are all tested identical so its a fair assessment.
    The previous poster is exceeding the rated mileage. I bet you, that if 10 different people drove your car over a set route with a fixed distance and at the same time of the day, you would end up with 10 different fuel ratings.
  • mml1mml1 Posts: 2
    Roger that... had expected much better out of a small car with a 2.4L engine. 32 was ONE trip, done in winter. Generally sitting around 29-30 on the highway.

    That said... it is summer in Florida, and I suspect that is the biggest culprit...
  • jimpimmsjimpimms Pittsfield MAPosts: 81
    edited July 2011
    I have a '10 EX 5-spd manual sedan. I bought this car because it has a nice balance of power and fuel efficiency, the handling is much better than one should expect from a simple torsion-beam rear suspension, and it's good-looking. It's a hoot to drive this car spiritedly.

    My mileage around town is usually 22-23 mpg. Since I have a heavy foot, I'm not disappointed with those figures. Highway trips (300-400 mi. @ 70-75 mph, with occasionally higher bursts) are always in the 32-34 mpg range, which at those speeds I consider excellent.

    My wife and I took a 100 mile round trip today, mostly on 45-55 mph non-Interstate roads (which I exceed by 5-10 mph, and I eventually pass anyone who doesn't). Combined with the 90 miles of mostly city traffic I had already clocked, I got just over 29 mpg.

    No complaints here.
  • jessica82jessica82 Posts: 4
    edited September 2011
    I drive in the city and just calculated mine to be 21.7 on a 2011 Kia Forte 5 door. I don't have a heavy foot so I'm not sure why I'm getting less than advertised. My Eco light is usually on too. Hmmmm....
  • bmc4bmc4 Posts: 1
    I have a 2001 Forte 5door That I drove from gas station to gas station
    on I 95 going south from georga to Fl in eairly eve (not very Hot) going slightly down hill all the way on cruse from ramp to ramp 70mph with Eco light on all the way got 30.5 Mpg this is a real best case test for the car its a ex auto rated at 36hwy 26 city I took it to kia to have it checked they had me run 3 tanks of gas through it from the same staion to ck. local mpg which is Avg. 19mpg combined local & Hwy. I have spoken to the AG's office here in Fl. and they agree that this will fall under Fl lemon law and if KIA can't get car to with in epa's + or - Std. on this 3rd "fix" that they will have to take it back. I sugest others with same problem Call KIA and tell them they to will invoke there states Lemon laws I have other cars and have never had a car that I didn't get est mpg or better Even now my other cars on the same run beat est.
  • just bought a2011 kia forte ex. 6000 km. first tank of gas managed to squeak out 285 km ..all city driving. very light on the gas. i expected twice as much. city driving 16 liters per 100 km. whats up with that? any suggestions would b appreciated.
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    how did you calculate that figure? Give us some figures so we can double check your calculation.
    I tracked my 2.4L Rondo over 14 months after purchase and the worse tank full I got was 11.8/100km and that was in extremely bad weather conditions.
  • gcoombsgcoombs Posts: 4
    edited November 2011
    i bought the car oct 12 11 with a full tank of gas and approx 6500 km.
    1 full tank is 51.8 liters. i drove this car,easy on the gas pedal, city driving ony, untill the gas indicater was just below the last mark. i got 288 km.
    car is rated to 573 km......9l/100km. seems i got 5.5km/liter. 49.5km/9liters,a little better than my previous figures. But still not what i was told to expect. the road condtions and weather were good.
    thanks
    gary
    NFLD
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    well its obvious you didn't figure it out right, 52L is the total capacity of the fuel tank not what you used, other wise you would have been stranded and out of gas! It's quite possible you had another 50-75 km left in the tank before it would be empty and also did the low fuel light come on? How much fuel did you put in the tank to cover the 288 km? Is it a 2.0L or 2.4L?

    I would run a few tank full recording the amount of litres put in the tank (till the pump shuts off) and record the km covered. You don't know how full the tank was when you bought it as you didn't fill it. Don't go off a fuel gauge as being dead accurate, they never are.
  • the person i bought the car off filled the tank, till it clicked off,it was full,as i was there.i ran the car with the low indicater light on for 30 km as i wanted to see how many km i could get. the car is a 2.0. it is rated at 573 km per tank,city driving. 288 plus 50(reserve) is 338 km, 235 km short of my expectations,a big difference.
    i visited kia today for an oil change,inquired about this issue,answer...the car needs to broken in..up to 12 or 13000km(service dept ans)8 or 9000 (sales dept ans). I really like the car and will keep track of my fuel milage and make updates. any sugg to improve my milage apprec.
    thanks
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    you still didn't say how much fuel it took to fill it up after driving this 338 km?

    The fuel guide figures are a guide to compare various vehicles, it does not necessary mean that you will get it, it clearly states that. The are run under laboratory control conditions so its always consistent. You need to run a few tank fulls recording the mileage covered and the fuel it took to cover that distance.

    You are still comparing the range on the vehicle on a fuel tank that is run till empty - that does not happen! Is it a manual or automatic?
  • 93949394 VancouverPosts: 74
    edited November 2011
    don't believe the [profanity removed] from your dealer, your Kia requires no extended breakin as stated in the owner's manual, my Kia was getting close to EPA hwy rating after 2 tanks, and improvement over the next 30K was minimal.

    city FE can be affected by many factors:
    cold weather, especially short trips, it can be up to 50% worse
    traffic pattern, rush hour, downtown...etc

    try testing on a longer trip, do not top up when filling up, try to do it at the same pump same gas station if possible for better accuracy.

    i repeat, do not believe your dealer, you are doing the right thing by posting in this forum.
    .
    2016 eSoul - All Electric - Zero Emission
  • manu6manu6 Posts: 2
    I have an identical fuel consumption problem.

    I bought a 2011 Forte 5 EX (2.0L, 6-speed) in July 2011.

    For the first 5 tank fill-ups (45-46 liters, read at the pump, I usually fill up as soon as the gas light turns on) I was averaging 500-520 km (city driving and air conditioning running, echo light on most of the time).

    Then ... in September (still very good weather conditions in Toronto, but no need for air conditioning) I noticed that I could only get 400 km out of the 45 liter fill-up. And now I average 380 km (5 fill-ups so far).

    I asked the question at the KIA dealer this week, as I was going to get the first oil & lub (odometer 4000 km, mostly city driving, echo light always on), and I was told that the engine was wearing out and that it's normal to see an increase in consumption. I thought it was [non-permissible content removed] (from 500+ down to 380km ... come on).

    What I noticed though, is that when driving on a flat surface at about 50 km/h, no acceleration, the transmission shift to the 5th gear (!) and the engine runs at 1000 rpm. Is that really gas efficient ???

    I heard that parameters of the transmission control module can be adjusted to improve gas consumption on some other cars. Can it be done on the Kia Forte 5 and how?
  • The fuel consumption should be reduced, not increased as it breaks in for the first few thousand km, so that part from the dealer is nonsense. Maybe a sensor is going bad, and the fuel mixture is wrong, or something like that? It does not sound right.

    My 2010 Forte 5-speed auto will shift down to 5th gear so as to run around 1200 rpm at 40 mph (70 km/h), but I have never seen it down to 1000 rpm. It should be gas efficient at that speed though.
  • 93949394 VancouverPosts: 74
    you only managed to drive 4000km in 5 months, probably lots of short trips?
    compounded by the cold weather in November, i think what you see is normal.

    .
    2016 eSoul - All Electric - Zero Emission
  • I GET 16L/100K. CITY DRIVING WITH A VERY LIGHT FOOT. POSTED THIS ON THE KIA SITE ON FB AND NEVER GOT A REPLY. ASKED SALES DEPT THEY SAID CAR NEEDS 8 TO 9000 KM TO B BROKE IN, I THEN WENT TO THE PARTS DEPT, AS I WAS THERE TO GET MY 60 DOLLAR OIL CHANGE,AND ASKED THEM THE SAME QUESTION AND THEY TOLD ME THE CAR NEEDED 12,000 TO 13,000 KM TO B BROKE IN. THEY HAVE MY 25,000 NOW SO TO BAD FOR ME. STUCK WITH IT NOW.
  • I am having the same problems. Driving from IL to St. Louis, I only got 26 mpg, going 70, using the heat only about a third of the time. I haven't even broken 30 mpg one time. I also previously had a '02 Elantra GT that I loved to death, but it died in a fender bender against a much larger car to my sadness. I have 10k miles on the car, and if anything, the fuel economy has gotten worse, not better. I have the 2.0 L automatic, and the 36 mpg highway rating seems like a filthy filthy lie to me.

    If anyone has any luck having anything done in the shop to increase fuel economy, please post. I'm going to be keeping quite a careful log and be looking into lemon laws.
  • Same here. I actually just pulled up next to a guy with another 2.0L 5-door EX and he said the same thing. 26mpg is the absolute most seen by either of us. I do 80% highway driving which makes this even more ridiculous. It's actual got me looking into swap-a-lease.com. I tried talking to the people at the service department and all I got was shoulder-shrugs and "yeah, we've been hearing that a lot from people". If anyone comes up with something, let the rest of us know!
  • I am pretty furious. My experience with my 2012 Forte Sx has been less than optimal to date. I liked the "get up and go" that the car had, and enjoy it's look. My problem: by my one year anniversary I have lost the love. There are spots on the hood where you can see white underneath the red paint, suggesting that peeling is on it's way. Dealer says NOT COVERED. SORRY...and to reassure me saide "HONDA AND TOYOTA ARE HAVING SIMILAR ISSUES." That really made me feel better about it!

    It has the loud rhythmic engine noise that I have had looked at 3 times now, each time being told "it is normal."....

    and now this.....

    My car gets about 18 mph city. That is SIGNIFICANTLY less than the 23 that the KIA specs list. SO HOW COME I'm not going to get the benefit that other KIA owners are going to get related to the KIA MPG fraud?

    As you can tell...I am a little HOT right now regarding this.

    Sorry...didn't get much sleep last night.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 11,105
    If you are a Hyundai or Kia owner and have a reaction to the company’s announcement today re: EPA fuel economy ratings, please email [email protected] today to talk with a reporter.

    MODERATOR

    Need help navigating? [email protected] - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

    Share your vehicle reviews

  • 93949394 VancouverPosts: 74
    I can understand your frustration dealing with the (no)service department of a dealer.

    In general, Kia has made huge improvement over the quality of their cars in the last few years, but unfortunately, the service managers/techinians at the dealers level are not keeping up.

    .
    2016 eSoul - All Electric - Zero Emission
  • Yes. I have now had my 2012 KIA Forte 5 EX for seven months, and have been shocked at the horrible mileage. I held off, as I was waiting to see how it "broke in." And in-spite of the salesman saying it gets better than advertised; I discounted that, and went with the stickered average. That being the case, and doing 90% highway driving on a 20 mile commute, I was expecting between 31-33 combined, and 34-36 hwy. I am now at 9k miles, and the engine is broke in with no mileage gains over new. I am getting a low of 24 and never better than 29, with an average of 28. I have tried ECO on and ECO off with no difference. I have filled up, and driven our Legacy Parkway on cruise at 55 both directions (40 mile RT), and I got 29.

    In a world where we all know every car dealer is a liar, and the government sanctions their lies with economy stickers, our situations are not surprising. As I read more and more of these stories, it is starting to push me to find legal counsel and push for a class action on a contingency, and with any luck we can get them to respond like Hyundai did over their incorrectly advertised mileage. My son recently received a letter from Hyundai apologizing for the incorrectly reported mileage, and told him to take it in to certify mileage and they would cut him a check. They will continue to do this for the time he owns the car, as long as the mileage is certified, and they will do so at the rate at the rate at which he pays for gas. They are offering him a check at the rate of 1 or 2 mpg depending on the vehicle type.
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    you will find that your son will get a VISA debit card for the amount from Hyundai not a cheque.

    https://hyundaimpginfo.com/faq
  • Over a period of one month, I have been trying to speak with representatives at Kia's MPG Reimbursement program about the serious mpg problems of the 2013 (and i assume the 2012 also) Kia Forte 5-Door EX. It took me one month to finally reach someone who apparently had the power to adjudicate my situation. These are the facts I gave that person:

    -Over four gas fillups the car averaged 21mpg.

    -My driving route on a weekly basis is composed of about 80% highway, 20% city.

    -I use the same two gas stations every time.

    -My mileage (when I finally reached the right person from KIA) was 2648 miles.

    -The "Instant MPG" ratings on the trip computer in the gauge cluster NEVER has read more than 26mpg, despite going 65mph with no traffic for 20 miles on a consistant basis (and yes, I took this reading over the same course of road over 10 times through summer, fall and now winter weather)

    -The 2013 KIA Forte 5-Door EX seemingly has the same 2.0L engine and transmission as a similarly equipped 2013 KIA Soul. The 2013 KIA Soul even had the EXACT SAME mpg estimates (before the announcement of the mpg mistakes). The 2013 KIA Soul HAS BEEN INCLUDED in the mpg reimbursement program plan.

    -The Forte and Soul are within 100 lbs. of each other (the Forte does weigh more than the Soul which does affect mpg, but the forte has a better air drag coefficient)

    -Any driver of the same car or even 2012 model complains of the same exact issue.

    I may not be an engineer, and I do realize that there are factors that affect mpg outside the control of the mpg ratings, but prior to having this Forte, I drove probably more than 15 different cars via rental agencies over the past year. Since they were rentals, my primary concern was mpg and not paying more money than necessary. I can say that most of those cars that I drove were pretty accurate in their MPG ratings. NONE of them were even close to being as far off the mark as my Forte.

    After presenting all of this information to the one person who supposedly is able to pull the trigger on a decision, I received the same policy book responses that I got from every other representative I spoke with.

    The person never once said that any of my points may be valid. The only thing she kept on saying was that there are factors that most people don't take into account and that I should read fuelconsumption.gov to identify these factors. That is it. Over a period of 1 hour of talking. I told her how I took estimates of my mpg over a 4-fillup period (using the method suggested on fuelconsumption.gov) and she said that KIA only recognizes mpg estimates figured individually after a single tank of gas.

    Here's the most telling aspect of this situation: None of the representatives I spoke with EVER suggested I take the car to the dealer and have it looked at. No one. To me, this says that they know they have a problem. An informed consumer calls and complains of a serious discrepancy between official MPG estimates and real-world mpg and never once does a single representative suggest that the car be looked at. That is a clear indicator that KIA knows they have a problem with the Forte.

    I encourage all of you who read this post to call the KIA MPG Reimbursement department and complain. This is the only way they might (independently) change their policy. When you call, please ask for Tammy. That is the person I spoke with who is at the top of the department (or so I've been told). If everyone calls, this will fill her time with nothing but Forte complaints.

    The number is (855) 912-5648 and ask for Tammy.

    The other avenues to pursue are media exposure (which I will be following up with Edmunds.com) and also State lemon laws or State Consumer Protection agencies. I am doing both of these and encourage every one who is sick of being lied to or ignored to do the same.

    If anyone has better luck than me, please write back and tell us how you succeeded.
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    edited December 2012
    have had the specs checked by the dealer? that's not the site to use for your problem anyway, they are just there to answer questions with regards the rebate program, you should be posing your complaint to the Kia Motors US website

    The 2.0L Forte engine and the Soul 2.0L engine are not the same. The Forte has used the same Theta II series engine since its introduction in 2010.
    The 2.0L Nu series engine in the Soul was new for 2012.

    this is the EPA tests, note the times/distance and the average speed for the highway and city ratings. Also test vehicles have many thousands of miles too. They are not tested new and also use 100% gasoline at sea-level.

    image

    this is worth a read too:
    http://www.edmunds.com/fuel-economy/heres-why-real-world-mpg-doesnt-match-epa-ra- - tings.html
  • @conwelpic

    Thanks for the info and links, especially about the engine. That is definitely good to know. It helps no one to present a false argument. I tried finding that info myself (should have just called the dealer) but wasn't able to confirm (hence the "seemingly the same"). I will be dropping that argument from here on out.

    Here's the funny thing though. After speaking with KIA reps for one month and using the same information, that is the first time that anyone has corrected me on the engine data. Originally, I tried going through the Consumer Assistance department at KIA, but they always sent my case back to the MPG Reimbursement department.

    And trust me, I didn't buy this car expecting a combined fuel cycle of 29 mpg (advertised). I assumed that it would be a little less. But we're talking about 8mpg below what is advertised which could be a difference of hundreds of dollars come year end based on continued driving cycle (which is by necessity very steady).

    Also, while my scrutiny hasn't been as focused at other times, I have always taken note of the mpg figures for other cars I have driven (not a small sum) in the recent past. This includes being able to post a real-world mpg of 26 (combined) for a 2013 ford mustang V6 (what I was doing renting a mustang and then driving it like a 1st gen toyota prius is a completely different story) over the course of two fillups.

    The numbers are always different than what is advertised and I understand why. It is a complicated issue that does require a lot of technical knowledge. But at least a part of the problem comes with KIA's refusal to even consider the issue, despite the fact that the EPA has forced them to correct the numbers for a large portion of their lineup. And parent company Hyundai has had to do the same.

    It's not like I'm a bandwagon complainer/opportunist just trying to get some free money. I wrote my first post about this issue before the announcement was made by the EPA and KIA. To tell the truth, I really like the Forte overall. Unfortunately, budget is a very serious concern of mine and every dollar has to be watched and accounted for. Spending $40-70 more than was budgeted (when I bought the car the budgeted for a combined mpg of only 26, the posted city cycle for mpg) every month makes a difference for me.

    If anyone else has data or info that they think is helpful for understanding this situation, I would appreciate it greatly. Thanks!
  • conwelpicconwelpic Ontario, CanadaPosts: 600
    just a bit more trivia - the 2010 and 2011 Soul used the Beta II series 2.0L engine.
    The new upcoming 2014 Forte will be using different series engines too.

    I would try and narrow down your specific area of excessive fuel consumption by resetting the AVERAGE on your computer gauge for short test sections, which could give you a better guide as to where it might be occurring, even though you claim its not reading right, it would still help you. I find on my Soul (2012 2.0L model) that is sometimes optimistic by .2L/100 km (I'm in Canada) and sometimes pessimistic by approximately the same, so overall its pretty close to actual manual calculations so for all intents and purposes its reasonable accurate to go off it.
    E.G. set it for the highway driving only, you said 65 mph, then try it again at 55 mph and see what you get. Also reset it for city traffic say for 5-10 miles or whatever that section of driving that you do on a daily basis. It will give you a rough idea when the fuel is being used the most and under what conditions its happening.

    On my 2.0L Soul over 21 fill-ups my average is 8.3L/100 km or 28.3 to the US gallon, worse was 9.1 (25.8) and best was 7.3 (32.2). But my driving conditions could be totally different to yours. On short checks I've seen it get as low as 5.3 (44.4) but that soon changes as your driving speed increases. :)
  • mave 2010 kia forte 4 door i was told i would get 35-42mpg and i have never gotten that much 30 mpg would have to be the most ever what can be done about this i was lied to and basically raped on this deal i thin kia should be held reliable
Sign In or Register to comment.