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!

How has COVID-19 impacted your car shopping? Click here to help us help drivers like you with a 5-min questionnaire.
Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

2013 Dodge Dart SXT Rallye Long-Term Road Test

Edmunds.comEdmunds.com Posts: 10,112
edited September 2014 in Dodge

image2013 Dodge Dart SXT Rallye Long-Term Road Test

Edmunds updates the fuel economy on its long-term 2013 Dodge Dart SXT Rallye for the month of August. The Dart is now averaging 27.4 mpg.

Read the full story here


Tagged:

Comments

  • It's time for Edmunds to cut bait and run from this POS. Swallow your pride, take the $8500 CarMax offers and declare the Dart the massive Fiasler failure that it is. Just pathetic.
  • You are really doing your readers and your credibility a disservice. Here is the truth: the EPA mpg ratings are based on using 91 octane fuel but yet you use 87 octane gas and then crticize the car for not getting the EPA ratings. That is just blantant misreporting and you have now done this type of thing on your Dart updates since the beginning. I don't know if this is bias and being done on purpose or just a reflection on how ignorant your journalists are. You owe your readers, your credibility and Chrylser a retraction and the honest truth. There is nothing wrong with using 87 octane gas with the car but you need to state the EPA sticker ratings are based on using 91 octane.
  • Poor little dby... he actually bought one of these turds.
  • duck87duck87 Posts: 649
    @dby2011: The owner's manual says "87 Octane Acceptable – 91 Octane Recommended". Therefore, what Edmunds doing is fully in scope of the manufacturer's "Acceptance" criteria. The company should be insisting on 91 if they didn't w
  • duck87- how dense are you? Look at the EPA ratings- it is based on using premium fuel- www.fueleconomy.gov You forgot to mention what else is written in the owner's manual next to the great big 91 on the page -"For optimum performance and fuel economy the use of 91 octane or higher is recommended" You cannot say the car is failing it's EPA ratings when you are not using the fuel that the ratings are based on. This is not complex stuff. Edmunds is flat out deceiving people.
  • This is a pretty fail article and about 99.76% of the reason why I abandoned Edmunds years ago. Where's the mention of driver style, road conditions, weather, elevation, etc, and so on? Only mention of broken things and poor mileage.

    On 87 octane I was receiving the EPA estimate 29/39 and continue to do so on super 93 octane. I drive a route full of twists, turns, and hills among straights, and highways. I don't drive like a granny, but there is no need to push the car.

    Some people are so butt hurt over Dodge's past history their do anything to nay say.

    If you're not behind the wheel experiencing your own, then you really have no reason to put 100% faith in what this misleading author has to say.
  • I've got over 6,500 miles on my Dart 1.4T 6 spd manual. The lowest I've ever seen it get was 32.59 MPG on the first tank, which was when I was breaking the motor in. The lowest I've gotten since engine break in was 40.72 MPG on a 594.9 mile tank using Shell 93 octane (no 91 around here). My lifetime average is 44.06 MPG, with my best tank at 49.89 MPG over 720.6 miles. I don't know what these drivers at Edmunds are doing, but they apparently don't know the proper way to drive a small displacement turbocharged car...
  • Don't forget Edmunds drives these cars all over LA and they typically get way worse mileage than what people in tamer traffic cities/towns are getting. So while I agree you can't compare the EPA ratings on premium with a car being driven on 87 octane, I would guess most people buying this (economy) car will try to save money and run it on 87. So it is a pretty realistic situation, just a bad comparison.
  • This is wrong. I own a Dart and live in Denver (high elevation = less power and worse fuel economy) and I have been averaging 40 highway and about 30 city and roughly 34 when split 50/50. I go about 70mph on the highway on average and don't necessarily take it easy in the city either. I have a 6 speed 1.4 limited and would encourage people to try the Dart for themselves before jumping to any conclusions. I'm not saying everyone should expect similar results to mine but what this article is saying must be fabricated. Either that or they sit in traffic 90% of the time and consider that "Highway". I would also note that the manual that comes with the car states not to expect the higher fuel economy or as much power unless you use PREMIUM fuel. The article states they are using 87 octane which could also account for poor mileage.
  • I drive Limited with 2.0 engine and getting 27 in the city and around 40 highway driving.... this car is awesome gas saver, dear Edmunds, stop posting bs about nice cars !!
  • I do not know how this author drives or the traffic situation he is in, but I am currently getting 36mpg combined highway/city on 87 octane.
  • duck87duck87 Posts: 649
    @dby2011: I think you need a moment to calm down and carefully read what I wrote again. I didn't say the car was failing its EPA ratings; the complaint is about low(ish) fuel economy in general. In this case it's not ideal for the owner's manual to mentio
Sign In or Register to comment.