Howdy, Stranger!

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

Hyundai Tucson Real World MPG

steverstever Posts: 52,683
Please report on your Tucson's gas mileage here. Please include your odometer reading, driving style, city/highway numbers or anything else you think may help others.


  • mboyermboyer Posts: 2
    I bought a new 2006 limited V6 Tucson. Sooooo disappointed with its performance, with the gas consumption - around 14- 18 mpg (depending if I dare use the air conditioning around town, and it finally made 25 mpg on a run (whoopee) Not only that there seems to be a time delay when I need to put my foot down and overtake someone. Very dangerous at times...Any one else with the same problem? Have done about 4,500 miles.
    Want to sell it..anyone want it????
  • targettuningtargettuning Posts: 1,371
    A.) your fuel mileage is quite whoopee IS a good term for 25 MPG!!
    B.) lack of power or just poor planning on a potentially close pass on a two lane road? They are adequate, not a V-8 but sufficient to make most overtakes safely.
    C.) did you perform a test drive on both city streets and a higher speed drive on an interstate to determine if this car met your needs? Yes, test drives are not long enough so that is why I rent cars of the type I am consider buying.
  • rebaveryrebavery Posts: 1
    What color choices do you have (inside and out) and how much would you want to sell it for? Oh and where do you live?
  • rcaslickrcaslick Posts: 1
    I have to agree I too have a 2006 V6 Tucson and can't get any better than 28 mpg. I achieved that by filling up on the Hwy and driving with the cruise set and not using A/C.
    The dealer did a test by filling the vehicle and driving it 100kms and re-fueling it from the same pump, he claims to have gotten 45 mpg. This is more of an insult than a test. I like the vehicle and have 30000kms on it since Feb. 06, I just wish I could increase and average closer to what the manufacturer advertised for gas mileage.
  • targettuningtargettuning Posts: 1,371
    I simply cannot believe why anyone would complain about 28 mpg...simply incredible. Please, please check some of the other posts here concerning fuel economy, people are complaining about low 20's (and truly this is about right for an SUV) and I am surprised you think you got 28. I would have to agree 45 mpg is Toyota Prius territory and NEVER able to be duplicated with any straight gasoline SUV.
    I have make my usual speech here about "advertised" fuel economy because apparently people still don't get it.
    The EPA mandates every new car, truck, SUV be tested by an outmoded test first devised in the 1970's. Every manufacturer submits a sample of every vehicle they make and the EPA subjects these to that obsolete test that simulates a city simulate I mean they test the car on a dyno indoors and the car never actually gets driven. The highway test does have the car being driven for some short period at artificially slow speeds (I think 60 mph or a bit more) and in no way does any of this testing produce anything remotely what Mr Joe public (you and me) will actually get in use so you complain...I'm not getting what the manufacturer, by God, said I would get!! That EPA sticker says, if you care to read the fine print, these numbers are estimates and are to be used for comparison purposes with other vehicles within the same size and type i.e. small-size SUV's. And this is is NOT an advertisement placed there by Hyundai (or any other manufacturer) that promises you WILL obtain the posted numbers. There are published articles by various national magazines...Consumer Reports...among others that detail how and why that little window sticker is almost totally wrong. And before I get blasted by owners who say that they regularly get as much or better than the sticker I say "good for you" and you must be living right and driving slow..
  • steverstever Posts: 52,683
    I read not too long ago that manufacturers test their own vehicles (usually a prototype) and they report the results to the EPA. The EPA then tests 10 to 15% of the vehicles to keep 'em honest. link

    The EPA is supposedly revising the test to make the numbers more real but I didn't see a link off-hand.

    The CR study just used new cars for their testing if I'm reading the article right (link) - my cars have always better mpg after they've broken in a bit.

    Steve, Host
  • targettuningtargettuning Posts: 1,371
    Yes, manufacturers also do their own testing but must submit "production" versions for official EPA tests. This "production version" term does not prevent manufacturers from tweaking those "production" vehicles to within an inch of their other words they are optimized for maximum fuel economy and us, as consumers, are unlikely to have the small army of engineers check and double check settings and clearances on actual production vehicle we can buy as they routinely do on the EPA submitted cars.
    Yes the vehicles Consumer Reports used are new cars they purchase for their normal testing BUT in other articles on how they perform their testing they always state they perform proper break-in proceedures before official testing so the cars are not "0" miles new. Their biggest concern was the "city" rating (it had the largest discrepency) but the highway rating also didn't track. And as always mileage varies depending on many variables.
    Finally, yes again, the EPA itself acknowledges its own testing is outdated and also flawed (it never was very accurate) and has set out to revise the test to reflect more real world numbers. How they will fare this time remains to be seen.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,683
    Funny thing is, lots of people around the forum (including me) have always hit the EPA number or better. Go figure.

    Steve, Host
  • bjw1bjw1 Posts: 152
    Hello all,
    well let me add my two cents in here, I just came back from holiday trip on 4th of july weekend. And I was going 80mph nad was getting 23.5 mpg when my tucson only had 1000 miles, now I am at 1500 when I got back, I agree that the window sticker mpg is an estimate on averages but it is possible to avg that, but also lots of factors play a role, like tire pressure, speed, weather conditions, road conditions. I saw my mpg plummet when climbing hills, went from 23.5 to 19.0 mpg while climbing hills. Anyone that buys an suv should not expect great mpg and I knew this when I bought the tucson, and when I shop for a vehicle I usaully subtract at least 1 mpg from what sticker states. I have found does not matter what the mpg is on a car if it does not achieve it people complain, when it is an average not a fact. my tuscon has not got more than 23.5 on highway and 19.0 mpg in city, but it is still only 1500 miles. :shades:
  • targettuningtargettuning Posts: 1,371
    Yes to all your points.... finally someone who sees that a Tucson, or almost any SUV will not get great fuel economy simply because it is a tall, big, fairly heavy thing with the aerodynamics of the box a Civic came in plus all the parasitic losses of the 4WD/AWD system... some may be good relatively speaking as compared to a Hemi whatzit but none are great.
  • targettuningtargettuning Posts: 1,371
    And I have found after owning several SUV's that some have gotten close, say 22mpg verses 23mpg EPA sticker highway but nothing spectacular like 28 or 30. And how and where you drive and conditions, both weather and vehicle, DO make a large difference.
  • tenpin288tenpin288 Posts: 804
    Well, let me throw my .02 in. I have an 05 V6 LX AWD. It is rated at 19/24. When I first got it my mileage varied wildly from a max of 22 mpg to a low of 14.5 mpg. Since then I have put almost 16000 miles on it, changed to a full synthetic oil (Pennzoil Platinum), a K&N air filter, and run the tires a few pounds higher than stock pressures. I am currently averaging 18.5-19 mpg during my daily driving (in the hills and valleys of the Laurel Highlands of PA) and recently got as high as 24.5 mpg on a trip to a conference for work. That trip was about 650 miles round trip at sustained speeds of about 75 mph on cruise control. Not too bad for this comfortable, well-built SUV. :shades:
  • vegito1971vegito1971 Posts: 24
    I am glad to see that somebody else on here supports my experience too. I also run full syntheitc oil (Mobil 1 5W30) and use a K&N air filter. Though I can not nor would not claim that this makes a night and day difference, it does seem to help. I am just happy to see that my numbers were not or are not a fluke.
  • So far I have about 1200 miles on my 3 week old 2006 V6 Tucson. I have averaged about 20 mpg by my calculations (not the mileage gage on the trip od). I do about 50/50 hwy/city so I was hoping for something more around 22-23 mpg since I'm not an aggressive driver. However, it is summer in Phoenix and with 100+ degree days, the a/c is always on full blast. Husband plans to put in a K&N filter after 3k miles so we'll see if that helps. May take a road trip to Denver too so we'll see how she does on that.

    While I'm slightly disappointed in the mileage (a relative just bought a Santa Fe a week after we bought the Tucson and gets the same mileage), I didn't buy it for fuel economy. I bought it because I loved how it drove, how it looks, how comfortable it was, and how practical it is with all the cargo space and features. It's so much more enjoyable to drive than my old sedan. :)
  • fk322fk322 Posts: 15
    I agree. If you are looking for impressive MPG DONT BUY A SUV. In particular, a SUV with a V6 plus AWD/4WD. I just got back from a long road trip (Minnesota to South Carolina) and was able to get 26MPG (at best) with AC on travelling 70 to 75 MPH in my 05 Tucson GLS. IMO, not bad for an SUV.
  • vegito1971vegito1971 Posts: 24
    Hyundai cars/SUV's seem to have a longer "break-in" period than some others. Just give it some time (and mileage) adn you will begin to see some improvement. This held true for both my 2002 Santa Fe and my 2005 Elantra. But the K&N air filter is a good idea and full synthetic oil helps too. Just like others are saying, you do have to remember that it is an SUV and will not yield mind-boggling fuel economy. But it should improve a little after the "break-in" period. My Santa Fe started doing better after nearly 10k whereas my Elantra took until arount the 5k mark.
  • targettuningtargettuning Posts: 1,371
    After reading this last batch of posts I am gratified that they all seem to be so rational and the writers understand that an SUV is, well, not an Elantra or Civic and therefore are satisfied with the low to mid 20's they are getting. I have been beating my head against the EPA sticker trying to explain that those are probably "pie in the sky" numbers and the low to mid 20's obtained (in the summer-lower in winter) is about right for highway driving. As a matter of the writer who said their relative's Santa Fe gets about the same mileage as the Tucson. The Tucson isn't really much lighter or smaller than the Santa Fe. All those swoopy fender lines on the SF makes it look much larger but it isn't and in fact the Tucson actually has a larger passenger compartment although smaller cargo area with seats up. Both share the same 2.7 liter engine and transaxle and driveline type. Too bought the vehicle for utility...4WD height for the ability to see over traffic, but probably not fuel economy and I'm glad at least one group is happy with what they get.
  • Both share the same 2.7 liter engine and transaxle and driveline type...Too bought the vehicle for utility...4WD feature

    Actually, his Santa Fe is the 3.5 L V6, so it's a bigger engine. And my Tucson is 2WD - not 4WD. I did buy it for the utility, as I stated previously. I also think it's just plain cute and fun to drive. :blush:

    [i]the low to mid 20's obtained (in the summer-lower in winter) is about right for highway driving.[/i]

    I'm averaging 20 mpg (haven't gotten over 20 yet) doing mixed driving. I expect it may go up in the winter when I'm not using the a/c. Everything is reversed down here in the desert; we get better mileage in the winter when it's only 60-70 degrees instead of 112+ degrees like it was yesterday. ;)
  • targettuningtargettuning Posts: 1,371
    Yes, since I have owned both the 2.7 Santa Fe and the 3.5 liter version (a 2002 4WD and the 3.5 was a 2003 4WD) I can explain the reason.... first the 3.5 has a 5 speed automatic verses a 4 speed and I found the engine runs about 600-700 RPM slower at any given road speed and therefore uses less fuel and also since the 3.5 has much more torque I found it didn't need to downshift nearly as much on the hills and mountains of Pa. So, as a result it stayed in 5th gear when previously the 2.7 might have been in 3rd gear. All in all I got slightly (about 1-2 mpg)better on the highway with the bigger 3.5 but less in town where the torque and 5th gear didn't matter.
  • slogo1slogo1 Posts: 1
    I'm just passing thru thinking about buying--I think your 26 mpg is great--I just wonder--what it would be like if you traveled 55-60 MPH?
  • kyedselkyedsel Posts: 5
    I just got back from a 1500 mile trip. Overall the fuel milage was 23.5. Coming back with 600 miles interstate driving with speed at 70 MPH and air on the fuel milage was 26.7.
  • fk322fk322 Posts: 15
    The posted speed limit was 65MPH and 70MPH in most locations. The 26MPG was the best I averaged. Overall,it was probably 23-24 for the trip. I'm not sure what 55-60 MPH would have got me in terms of MPG. There are very few interstates I have driven that still have 55MPH as the speed limit. I really like my Tucson and would recommend it to anyone thinking of buying one.
  • vegito1971vegito1971 Posts: 24
    Congratlutions and thank you for supporting my claim. I previously owned a 2002 Santa Fe 2.7L AWD and managed this routinely while cruising along at 65-70 MPH with the A/C running. I did find that using full-synthetic oil and a K & N air filter helped a little too.
  • kyedselkyedsel Posts: 5
    I use multi blend oil and a regular Car Quest filter. As I was driving on the trip I traveled of a 4 lane that had a lot of stop and go. The gas milage was around 23 MPG. My gas milage inproved when I got on the interstate and had a constent speed. :)
  • jveneziajvenezia Posts: 85
    I just drove 300 miles in the last two days, filling up once half way through. It was a mix of interstate and city driving, about 90 degrees, air conditioner running constantly, highway speed (between stop-and-go construction zones) was about 80 mph. Just me and a bit of luggage. I averaged 32.3 on the way to my meeting site, and 32.3 on my way back home. That's consistency. BTW, I use fully synthetic oil and a good aftermarket air filter.
  • targettuningtargettuning Posts: 1,371
    And I get 100 mpg at 100 mph...please excuse me if I don't buy your claims. Maybe you transposed your would be more accurate I think.
  • tidestertidester Posts: 10,059
    And I get 100 mpg at 100 mph...

    Now I am impressed! Seriously, perhaps jvenezia could provide some details on his calculations?

    tidester, host
  • steverstever Posts: 52,683
    Sounds entirely plausible to me. Tides will have to check my math as always but on my minivan, my spreadsheet is current through 345 tanks. 45 of those tanks exceeded the 24.0 EPA highway rating. Five tanks were over 28 and my all time high was 29.9. Sixteen were less than the EPA city rating of 17.

    So my all time best tank of 29.9 is 124.58% of 24 mpg.

    The 2.0l Tucson is rated at 22/27.

    So 32.3 is 119.62% of the highway EPA rating of 27 mpg.

    Maybe you'll do better next time, Jvenezia. :shades:

    All bets are off if Tides indeed "fixes" my math (let me guess, it should be 24% better, not 124% of), in which case I'm going to try to delete this post before the search engine spiders memorialize it for prosperity. :P
  • tidestertidester Posts: 10,059
    Ya done good, Steve! :)

    You make a really good point noting that there is significant variation from tank to tank. I've never been able to find reliable data on the spread in variation but I think it is important for people to realize that YMMV or, more correctly, your mileage WILL vary!

    tidester, host
  • targettuningtargettuning Posts: 1,371
    You know if that person had said he/she achieved this kind of mileage at a 55 or even a 60 mph average speed I might be more inclined to buy it. But, as we all know, fuel economy takes a nose dive as speed increases particularly with a blunt, tall, vehicle such as a Tucson (or almost any SUV) when air resistance overcomes any aerodynamics. To say you achieved over 30 mpg while averaging 80 mph is too much to believe...I have informally tracked how increased speed kicks economy in the rear and 72mph was the "sweet spot" on my Taurus after which I could literally see economy drop quite rapidly. I had a digital dash with a fuel monitoring function that turned out to be quite accurate tracked over about 100K miles of ownership. Keep in mind the Taurus was a lot more aerodynamic too. So, no, I don't believe that statement.
Sign In or Register to comment.