Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options

Toyota Camry Real World MPG

1…89111314…23

Comments

  • Options
    mcdawggmcdawgg Member Posts: 1,722
    Filled up today due to the likely price increase for the holiday weekend. 29.47 mpg, (294.1 miles, 9.98 gallons). I expected it to be down from my normal commute average, because I got stuck in a traffic jam due to an accident (14 minutes to go 1.5 miles) and I got sent on a Taco Bell run for lunch (10 minutes to go 100 ft.).

    If you are keeping track, this is my third fill-up that I reported the details, and the mpg has been very consistent (29.47, 30.51, 31.17).

    I know someone at work who has an 07 SE automatic - I'll ask about her mpg.
  • Options
    dremdrem Member Posts: 24
    Just filled up after a road trip. Four adults, one overnight cold start, 85% highway with cruise at 72mph. 443 miles using 13.2 gallons = 33.6mpg. 2004 4cyl auto.

    Doriep, 30+ mpg should be absolutely expected on the road. I don't drive 80mph, but I get (on both the 1999 and 2004 4cyl autos) 40mpg at 65 cruise and 36mpg at 72mph cruise. I would suspect another 13% loss or ~31.3 mpg if I drove at 80 mph cruise over 72mph...

    Tire type, tire pressure, wheel alignment, oxygen sensor, and especially ethanol content of the gasoline can all effect mileage. But with only 20-22 on the highway under cruise control, something is definitely different with the engine/car/fuel setup. Your car cannot possibly be requiring 35% more energy to roll down the highway than mine.

    Drem
  • Options
    dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    aha! That is the problem. Three miles from workk means the engine is never warm and is proably getting about 10 mpg. That will bring down the average real fast.
  • Options
    lmacmillmacmil Member Posts: 1,758
    Try a highway trip at 70 mph and see what happens. That should get you another 5 mpg. Still low for a 4 cyl though.
  • Options
    phd86phd86 Member Posts: 110
    As I've said (and several others):

    The 2007 is not as efficient as the prior style (2002-2006), which wasn't anything to write home about either. But it's a bigger boat, and a more powerful engine.

    I think you could probably pull 24-25 mpg or even a little bit more if you slowed down to 65, turned off the A/C, pumped the tires to 40 psi, and did pancake flat driving like me in Sacramento. The other issue you are having is that you are tracking every single tankful and odometer reading like a hawk, possibly even doing running averages and so forth. Most of the time, you'll see people posting their best mileage on one tank. They also have this habit of running it some short distance, like 200-400 miles, and then refilling up to the first click. Then saying, "look at me - I got 200 miles on 5 gallons! I get 40 mpg!" Problem is, they actually used 8 gallons, and got 25 mpg. Don't believe or disbelieve me, just try it some time. The 5 gallons is what they put into the car. After the first click, see how much gas you can put in the tank. For some reason, the gas tank neck on the recent camry backs up and causes premature shutoff with a whole lot of room left in the tank. 3 gallons of empty space is not "topping off".

    Just think about it. If this car (and by "this" I mean an AT, not MT) really got 35 mpg, wouldn't you think someone would be able to run it 600+ miles on a tankful? (that would be 17.1 gallons, with plenty of gas left over). Yet nobody ever has come close - not even as an extreme outlier. Not 35 mpg (630 miles), not 32 mpg (600 miles), not 30 mpg (555 miles). So it would unreasonable to expect 30+ mpg under normal circumstances as an average.

    There's also some notion (see earlier post/response to samian) out there that there is a "dead pool" in the bottom of a gas tank that you can't use the last bit of gas. Nope. You can use all the gas in a gas tank. And when its empty, there is no gas in it. I would bet you that an 18.5 gallon tank, when empty - does indeed hold 18.5 gallons of gas (I tested this on my older camry, albeit unintentionally).

    The other thing misleading about the camry is the gas gage reading. I too can pull 200 miles in the first 1/4 of the tank, using the gas gage. But do you think I used a 1/4 of 18.5 gallons? Not. The first 1/4 of the tank, on the gas gage, is something like 8 gallons. I swear to you, I have put in 11+ gallons into this car with the gas gage at half full. The first time it happened, it made me look under the car for leaks (there were none), but its just the gas gage.

    Oh, by the way, I made a slight error in my last report, it was 447 miles for 17.0 gallons. That's 26.3 mpg. It is a spot measure. It is what it is.

    My car is also capable of getting the mileage stated. I stated that it gets 26-28 mpg on pure freeway, and that's what it gets.
  • Options
    mcdawggmcdawgg Member Posts: 1,722
    "The 2007 is not as efficient as the prior style (2002-2006), which wasn't anything to write home about either. But it's a bigger boat, and a more powerful engine."

    Guess what, it is NOT a more powerful engine. The I4 in the '07-08 is the same engine as was used in the 2002-2006. The weight may be slightly more for the 07-08, but not by much, because the length is the same, but the width is up one inch. If I have time, I will look up the weights and the coefficient of drags.

    I will continue to monitor every tank, and fill up at the same pump, with about the same commute. I have now reported 3 in a row - (29.47, 30.51, 31.17). Very consistent, and even if there were "3 gallons of empty space", it would be the same for every fill up, so it would not matter, since I use the same pump and quit pumping after the automatic shut-off.

    Just a note on MPG variability: my Corolla will get about 37mpg on my commute, but when my wife drives it on her commute, it gets only about 25mpg. The difference? Lots of short trips (4 miles or less).

    Someone else care to comment about the alleged "3 gallons of empty space"?

    Happy Thanksgiving!
  • Options
    troylikesbikestroylikesbikes Member Posts: 132
    "I am incredibly steamed at my Toyota. I own a 2007 4cyl automatic SE. On a pure highway trip, with my kids in the back, not exceeding 80 mph I got 22 mpg. And that is the best i have ever gotten."

    I'd be incredibly steamed as well. I get 26mpg around town.
  • Options
    troylikesbikestroylikesbikes Member Posts: 132
    Just think about it. If this car (and by "this" I mean an AT, not MT) really got 35 mpg, wouldn't you think someone would be able to run it 600+ miles on a tankful? (that would be 17.1 gallons, with plenty of gas left over). Yet nobody ever has come close - not even as an extreme outlier. Not 35 mpg (630 miles), not 32 mpg (600 miles), not 30 mpg (555 miles). So it would unreasonable to expect 30+ mpg under normal circumstances as an average.

    PhD, you keep saying stuff like this and it simply isn't true. My 05 AT with the same engine as my 07 (2AZ-FE) got nearly identical mileage on trips. At high speeds loaded and A/C I could get 33 easy, and at slow eastern speeds I could crack 35, SAME AS ON MY 5SP MANUAL 07. I think if I ever drove the 07 slowly (60-65) for a tank of gas, the Manual would beat the Auto, but that is NOT what is causing the difference between my documented 35+ highway trips and your admittedly poor results.

    Your experience with AT's in Camrys simply isn't typical, and there are lots of others around who know this, and know it WITHOUT trying to run the tank dry in the middle of nowhere.
  • Options
    igrigr Member Posts: 17
    It looks to me that one of the major "arguments" here is about how much gas is actually pumped into the tank. Most of the people seem to be filling tank "full", driving, then taking odometer reading and dividing it by tank capacity.
    I may not understand something, but for calculation to be accurate you have to divide mileage by actual gallons used, not tank total capacity. Why not to take actual reading from the pump after fill-up, write it down together with odometer reading and do your math next time you fill you tank again. That's what I personally do. The only difference - I do not wait till tank is "empty" (this condition is not accurate enough for me), I always do my math when fuel gauge indicator reaches exactly at 1/4 mark. If I have to fill gas before I reach 1/4, I just keep adding amount of fuel to my last record and wait till my indicator reaches 1/4 mark.
    So far my mpg for 2004 Camry 4 Cyl. AT, 31 PSI, Mineral Engine Oil are much closer to PHD86 numbers than to people claiming more than 30 MPG on highway. My best highway reading so far is 29 mpg. Average is 28 mpg.
    The other good thing when discussing mpg for city would be to post the population of the city. It gives better understanding how heavy traffic might be and may explain the difference between city mpg for the same cars, driven in different traffic conditions.
    I live in Toronto, about 2.5 million people and my best summer city was 22 mpg so far. My average is about 20-21 mpg.
  • Options
    troylikesbikestroylikesbikes Member Posts: 132
    "It looks to me that one of the major "arguments" here is about how much gas is actually pumped into the tank."

    IGR, I don't think your concept is one of the major arguments. I believe PhD, and you, when you both say that your cars get crappier than expected results. Lets face it, calculating fuel mileage is easy, and as many people CAN'T be doing it wrong as get bad results for fuel mileage. It would mean that a large minority of the Camry owning community are incompetent when dividing one number by another, and with calculators, I just can't believe thats the reason for the wide variations, between models, where certain drivers always get worse results, and others always get better results.

    There has to be something else going on here, driving habits, quality of gasoline, mechanical, SOMETHING which explains the difference.

    I have come to EXPECT my Camrys to get 30+, period, hands down, no trouble, loaded and moving fast, V6 or I4, auto or stick. If I got the mileage you and PhD get I would be steamed and throwing banana's at my dealership when they couldn't find something wrong with my car.

    I think its unfortunate we can't get this figured out....its a decent car, and it really should get, at the LEAST, the highway mileage as stated on the sticker for EVERYONE. I mean really, 65mph roadtrips as long as you aren't climbing a huge mountain somewhere shouldn't by themselves have enough variation to cause these differences.
  • Options
    colloquorcolloquor Member Posts: 482
    The worst highway fuel mileage I have ever gotten on my 2007 Camry LE I4 AT is 34MPG. That's driving between 65 to 75 on the interstates, with an occasional blip to 80 around Chicago. City mileage is typically around 23 winter to 26 summer.
  • Options
    igrigr Member Posts: 17
    That was exactly my point, everybody is using calculator dividing mileage by tank capacity, but the tank capacity might be different between cars of the same model and year. Fuel gauge indicator is another factor. I heard from many people(not only Toyota) that it reports different gas amount in the tank on the cars of the same year and model filled with the same amount of gas.
    Let's imaging gas consumption is really the same for both my and your vehicle and is 35 mpg. We both filled full tanks(18.5 gallons) and drove on the same highway until fuel gauge indicator reports Empty. Your fuel gauge reports Empty, when your tank has left 0.5 gallon of gas left, mine reports Empty when there is 1.5 gallon left. Therefore you drove (18.5 - 0.5) * 35 = 630 miles, I drove only (18.5 - 1.5) * 35 = 595 miles. Then we both do our math. You take 630 and divide it by 18.5=34.1, I divide 595 by 18.5=32.2. Here we gave 1.9 mpg difference. Let's imaging that my pump shut off 1 gallon earlier than yours during initial fill-up, than my fuel gauge would report Empty when I drove only (18.5 - 1.5 - 1) * 35 = 560 miles and my mpg would be 560/18.5=30.3 mpg only. Here we have 3.8 mpg difference. ;)
    I'm not trying to say what mpg vehicle should produce, I'm saying that using MAXIMUM tank capacity is too inaccurate for comparing vehicles mpg. In my opinion, pump counter gives accurate amount of gas filled and should be used in calculations.
  • Options
    samiam_68samiam_68 Member Posts: 775
    I doubt ANYONE here is using tank capacity to calculate MPG. From all the reports on this forum, it seems almost everyone is doing it correctly - miles driven since last fill-up divided by number of gallons to fill up. By using tank capacity, you will have people reporting 50-60-70 MPG.

    Very few folks report partial MPG from the trip computer for certain legs of a trip. This is innacurate, but, again, these reports are few and far between.
  • Options
    dremdrem Member Posts: 24
    igr,

    No-one is dividing by tank capacity as far as I can see on this board. We start with a full tank, drive x miles, fill-up again and divide miles driven by gallons used. Its simple.

    There is some difference in defining what a fill-up is. For me, I use the same pump and fill speed for 98% of all fillups. I can't imagine being more than a tenth of a gallon or two off in any fillup when I stop at the first auto shut off. But just in case that is an issue I often fill up the gas to the top of the filler tube before and after a long trip just to be sure all is constant. In any case my mileage on the road is always 35+ mpg for 100% road cruising. It is my experience that I can fill about 1.6 gallons more past the first stop. Everyone needs to account for that if/when refilling for mileage calculation purposes.

    I know...filling up to the top of the filler tube may not be good for controlling evaporative emissions for the first hour of driving, but the overall effect on that tank of gas is minimal.

    Drem
  • Options
    phd86phd86 Member Posts: 110
    "The worst highway fuel mileage I have ever gotten on my 2007 Camry LE I4 AT is 34MPG. That's driving between 65 to 75 on the interstates, with an occasional blip to 80 around Chicago. City mileage is typically around 23 winter to 26 summer"

    This is a good example of the type of message language which I believe leads some people to purchase this car and be disappointed. To the contrary, my opinion is that there is no 2007 AT Camry in existence that has ever achieved 34 MPG at any time, no less never get less than 34 mpg as the "worst" highway fuel mileage. I've test driven this car and it does not get 25 mpg on the freeway. I might believe 26, but not 34.

    If you are thinking about getting the car - rent one and drive a full tank.
  • Options
    phd86phd86 Member Posts: 110
    PHD SAYS: Just think about it. If this car (and by "this" I mean an AT, not MT) really got 35 mpg, wouldn't you think someone would be able to run it 600+ miles on a tankful? (that would be 17.1 gallons, with plenty of gas left over). Yet nobody ever has come close - not even as an extreme outlier. Not 35 mpg (630 miles), not 32 mpg (600 miles), not 30 mpg (555 miles). So it would unreasonable to expect 30+ mpg under normal circumstances as an average.

    TROY SAYS: "PhD, you keep saying stuff like this and it simply isn't true. "

    "At high speeds loaded and A/C I could get 33 easy, and at slow eastern speeds I could crack 35"

    PHD's RESPONSE: By "could get", I surmise that you don't. And there aren't a bunch of posts on 600+ mile ranges, are there? I stand by my earlier post.
  • Options
    patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    It's entirely possible I am misunderstanding some of the points that some are trying make, but the bottom line is that figuring miles-per-gallon is not that hard.

    You fill up the car. You drive until it's time to fill up again. You note the miles driven since the last time you filled up and you note the gallons it took to fill the tank this time. You divide the miles driven since the last tank by the gallons it took to fill the tank this time and there you have it - Miles driven Per Gallon used.

    Tank capacity and however many miles one may or may not get from a "full" tank have nothing to do with actual MPG.

    There are many subtleties that can be applied to the basic formula I'm referencing (being sure you always fill from the same pump, use the automatic shut-off, don't top off, average over a number of tanks not just one, don't expect peak MPG until after the break-in period, etc.), but the basic formula will give you a very good idea of your fuel economy regardless of those things.

    There's no need to make this hard. :)
  • Options
    patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    my opinion is that there is no 2007 AT Camry in existence that has ever achieved 34 MPG at any time

    You are certainly entitled to your "opinion", but you cannot know that as a fact unless some pretty extraordinary circumstances apply. :)

    "Opinions" are generally irrefutable when they are stated about subjective things such as appearance. But when the word "opinion" is used to convey a sweeping statement of fact, not so much.

    Why don't we just agree that many of the folks here have different outlooks on this subject and stop going around in circles on it for the time being? Let's give it a rest for now.
  • Options
    troylikesbikestroylikesbikes Member Posts: 132
    "This is a good example of the type of message language which I believe leads some people to purchase this car and be disappointed. To the contrary, my opinion is that there is no 2007 AT Camry in existence that has ever achieved 34 MPG at any time, no less never get less than 34 mpg as the "worst" highway fuel mileage. I've test driven this car and it does not get 25 mpg on the freeway. I might believe 26, but not 34."

    So now...you aren't claiming that OTHER model year Camrys can't get 34-35 mpg, like my 2005 AT 2AZ-FE? Now we're going to try and defend ONLY 2007 model years? Which have the same motor and tranny as my 2005? I don't PhD, sounds like you keep back pedalling, what are you going to do when someone with a 2007 AT 2AZ-FE powered Camry comes in and verifies what many of the rest of us are experiencing with the last generation ( and the one before that...and before that...and before that )
  • Options
    troylikesbikestroylikesbikes Member Posts: 132
    PHD SAYS: Just think about it. If this car (and by "this" I mean an AT, not MT) really got 35 mpg, wouldn't you think someone would be able to run it 600+ miles on a tankful?

    ABLE to? Sure....but problem is why would anyone WANT to? When I drive 5000 miles in 6 days and can limit my fillup error to less than 1% of the fuel used, I sure don't need to get myself stranded in the middle of nowhere because I'm trying to pull some stunt to anwer a hypothetical question that the instant I answer it someone is probably going to call me a liar anyway.

    For the record, cracking 500 miles on the odometer and still having nearly 1/4 tank showing on the gage, it strikes me as quite reasonable I could do 600 on a tank. I just don't know why it can be the only measure of how my 2007 Camry gets 35 mpg and yours doesn't.

    "At high speeds loaded and A/C I could get 33 easy, and at slow eastern speeds I could crack 35"

    PHD's RESPONSE: By "could get", I surmise that you don't. And there aren't a bunch of posts on 600+ mile ranges, are there? I stand by my earlier post.

    No...when I said..."I could get", I should have said " I did get". Denver to Mount Rushmore, 2 adults, 2 kids, a dog, the trunk was full, and I used the A/C while doing 80+. DONE DEAL. Back east, Pennsylvania to Ocean City, back to Ohio, same load, using A/C, 35 mpg. 2005 AT LE 2AZ-FE.

    Your 600+ mile per tank is a strawman, based solely on the concept people don't want to run out of gas in the middle of nowhere, so they won't risk actually proving you wrong on this particular point.

    ( who in the world runs their tanks bone dry by the way? ANYONE? ) :P
  • Options
    samiam_68samiam_68 Member Posts: 775
    THANK YOU Pat!!! I was starting to get a headache... :sick:
  • Options
    bigrich20970bigrich20970 Member Posts: 7
    Have gone through 3 tanks of gas so far in my 2008 Camry SE v6....first tank was 25.3mpg, 2nd was 26.6mpg, and the last tank I averaged 28.4mpg.....certainly a far cry from my 2002 civic (38mpg), but not bad for a car this size and with this much power :-)
    on a side note, is anyone else annoyed by how non-linear the gas gauge is?
  • Options
    210delray210delray Member Posts: 4,721
    Is anyone else annoyed by how non-linear the gas gauge is?

    Hasn't this always been the case? A Ford engineer mentioned it's done on purpose, because people want to see their gauges remain on "Full" for some time after a fill up.

    On my '98 Nissan Frontier, the hash marks are even closer together between "E" and "1/4."
  • Options
    troylikesbikestroylikesbikes Member Posts: 132
    Have gone through 3 tanks of gas so far in my 2008 Camry SE v6....first tank was 25.3mpg, 2nd was 26.6mpg, and the last tank I averaged 28.4mpg.....certainly a far cry from my 2002 civic (38mpg), but not bad for a car this size and with this much power

    The 2008 has the 3.5 V6 in it right? My wife has it in her Sienna as well, trip mileage on that is 27-28mpg, I'm betting your Camry will do better yet. Although around town its pretty hairy, what with her lead foot and all.

    A guy at the office collected a 07 Avalon with the 3.5L V6 as well, the car RUNS when you give it the go juice. He gets a solid 30mpg on the highway as well. Amazing mileage considering how much power that motor makes.
  • Options
    lmacmillmacmil Member Posts: 1,758
    I love my 2005 SE V6 (3.3 liter) but the best I've ever done on an extended trip is 27.5 mpg and that was using premium. With regular 25-26 is typical. It's amazing than a bigger engine with 50 more hp can get better mileage but I know that's the case. I wonder how much the new 6 speed tranny contributes to the better mileage?
  • Options
    phd86phd86 Member Posts: 110
    A couple points to re-emphasize:

    1. One tank MPG's are essentially worthless because of the huge error in refilling the tank. One tank MPG's don't tell anyone anything about real-world gas economy. A case in point was the boast about getting 35 mpg going between Mount Rushmore and Denver, a distance of about 385 miles. The error in refill is somewhere around +1 to -3 gallons (probably the latter). This error is not additive, however.

    2. My original post about range, was simply to emphasize that as the miles driven is increased, the error is reduced - on single tank measurements. On multiple tank measurements, the error is also reduced, but ONLY if a continuous record is maintained. Picking out one or two tankfuls that gave 30+ miles per gallon, does not mean you got 30 miles per gallon, only that the error in refill was large for those particular tanks. This is what is being done here. It is not real world.

    3. A suggestion here as an alternative to the "whoopee - look what I got on one tank!": If you are going to report real world MPG, keep a continuous record, and report every 3,000 miles, all of the gas you bought and all the miles you drove.

    On that note, Edmunds did do a long term (3,000+ mile) test of the 2007 Camry, and reports a maximum of 27 mpg, minimum of 20 mpg, and an average of 23 mpg (I am pasting the link below - hope this works):

    http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=117036/pageNumber=1?s- ynpartner=edmunds&pageurl=www.edmunds.com/new/2008/toyota/camry/100900018/roadte- starticle.html&articleId=117036

    I think it would be great for someone like edmunds to allow anybody who wants to, to maintain a continuous record of their odometer/gas purchases on line for everyone to see. You could have a column that shows the 5 or 10 tank running average, and maybe a vehicle/model/year type average.

    Real world MPG's ARE worth knowing. But this stuff about what someone calculates from a single tank has too much error and bias to be of any use
  • Options
    dremdrem Member Posts: 24
    phd,

    In every, that's every, long distance drive with either my '99 or '04 Camry's with the CC set at 72mph I get over 32mpg. Bear in mind that the 32 is a one time low in the '99 driving against a serious headwind for two hours of the trip. The other 98% of long trips I get between ~35 and 36mpg.

    The error you claim in filling the tank full of gasoline can't be anywhere near +1 to -3 gallons or my mileages would have been all over the place on the high end. For example, a trip that I take several times a year is a 505 mile trip from NC to PA. I typically use ~14.0 to 14.5 gallons every time. (FWIW, that is about 3/8 tank indicated remaining). I never see the low fuel light come on (which usually comes on about 16.5/16.8 gallons consumed).

    If I used your filling error example, I would be seeing a range from ~32.6 to 45.1mpg...which I assure you neither ever happens.

    Just to check my speedometer/odometer I ran a highway milepost run a couple times. At 60mph indicated I am actually doing about 58. At an indicated 70 I am doing an actual 68mph. So I am assuming my 72 cruise is really 70mph. So a wildly off speedo can't be a source of my higher mileage. I also concede that my 72mph is slower than 90% of the cars on the road so I may be sucked along with some of them and drafting might improve it a bit. However, I made a 540 mile run from NC to FL overnight that was not seeing much traffic at all and used 15.0 gallons for a mileage of 36.0, so drafting does not really explain the high mileage, either.

    Consistent long range trips with consistent fillup volumes over scores of road trips over many weather conditions with both Camry's...and I get a consistent 35mpg. I can't imagine why most people can't get the same...unless the ethanol content is different in our gasolines or the oxygen sensors are set up differently.

    Regards,

    Drem
  • Options
    patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    You are still making it way too hard. I do a rough check of my mileage at every fill-up and it's always about the same given the same driving conditions. I've also, in the past, recorded all the details religiously, used the same pump, used the auto-shutoff, etc., and averaged it out over many tanks. Guess what? My rough one-tank calculations for every fill-up are very, very close to the meticulously figured average over several months and always have been.

    We are beating this subject beyond death. If you don't want to accept the way that people figure their mileage, that is your choice and your privilege. :) But let's agree to disagree and get off this merry-go-round.

    People would rather read the mileage figures people are offering than endless arguments over how it should be figured. It's everyone's individual choice whether to accept the posts or not.
  • Options
    210delray210delray Member Posts: 4,721
    Bravo, thanks for injecting some common sense into this.

    People don't generally make multi-thousand mile highway trips, so getting a long running average of highway-only mpg is not possible for most. Like most people, my trips are generally only several hundred miles long, so I do what I can to see how the car did on those trips, which might only involve two or three fill ups.

    Still, when I did post a detailed record of a cross-country trip (and then some) under less than ideal conditions (mostly 2-lane highways, stops/touring in towns and national parks, heavily loaded vehicle, in winter) and still got just over 30 mpg, it was dismissed because it supposedly wasn't up to a certain standard.

    And I agree, that when my car is used the same way, the calculated mpg values do not vary much.
  • Options
    troylikesbikestroylikesbikes Member Posts: 132
    1. One tank MPG's are essentially worthless because of the huge error in refilling the tank. One tank MPG's don't tell anyone anything about real-world gas economy. A case in point was the boast about getting 35 mpg going between Mount Rushmore and Denver, a distance of about 385 miles.

    Actually, the round trip is nearly twice as far! And it wasn't a boast, I simply listed it as fact. But I think the number was 33 mpg, 35 mpg is what I get when driving On that note, Edmunds did do a long term (3,000+ mile) test of the 2007 Camry, and reports a maximum of 27 mpg, minimum of 20 mpg, and an average of 23 mpg

    27mpg out of a V6!! Good for them...whats really funny is I get the same mileage out of the same motor in the Sienna.

    I think it would be great for someone like edmunds to allow anybody who wants to, to maintain a continuous record of their odometer/gas purchases on line for everyone to see. You could have a column that shows the 5 or 10 tank running average, and maybe a vehicle/model/year type average.

    I just did nearly 5000 miles from Denver to Cape Canaveral to see Octobers shuttle launch, got 35.5mpg and would love to use the results to show a standard frequency profile to at least get a handle on the uncertainty in any single tank. Anyone interested in the results? I think the range is like 32-38, the total for the entire trip was 35.5, which is the one which matters the most.
  • Options
    troylikesbikestroylikesbikes Member Posts: 132
    Consistent long range trips with consistent fillup volumes over scores of road trips over many weather conditions with both Camry's...and I get a consistent 35mpg. I can't imagine why most people can't get the same...unless the ethanol content is different in our gasolines or the oxygen sensors are set up differently.

    I'm on my 3rd Camry, and we've got 2 others in the family, we all get this kind of mileage. You know what though, droning through eastern Colorado and western Kansas, I consistently get WORSE mileage than anywhere else. Happens in my SUV, on my motorcycles, the Camry, my pickup. Its awful. I don't have a clue WHY I70 through there always gives me cruddy mileage, it just DOES.
  • Options
    210delray210delray Member Posts: 4,721
    Higher altitude? They're not called the "high plains" for nothing! Plus you're essentially going uphill when traveling westward, AND I would assume the winds are primarily from the west as well, providing a headwind.
  • Options
    troylikesbikestroylikesbikes Member Posts: 132
    Higher altitude? They're not called the "high plains" for nothing! Plus you're essentially going uphill when traveling westward, AND I would assume the winds are primarily from the west as well, providing a headwind

    In Kansas, the southern wind is renowned. And the problem is, the mileage drop happens going east or west, summer, winter, spring and fall. On nearly every vehicle I've ever driven through there.

    I get the usual mileage running from Denver to Vegas, which crosses 10K feet in elevation TWICE, but I can't do it in western Kansas.

    On the same trip, by the time I reach Kansas City, the mileage returns for normal the rest of the way to Pennsylvania or the coast. On the trip back, it starts heading downward again between Topeka and Hayes.

    Its usually in the 10% range ( so 3.5 mpg on the Camry ) but its been as bad as 20% on two different motorcycles ( 40mpg instead of 50 mpg ).
  • Options
    210delray210delray Member Posts: 4,721
    Late summer trip to Indy, then Detroit and back home (central VA) in 2005 Camry, 4-cylinder, 5-sp auto, mostly freeway:

    Date...........Odo/trip odo...Gallons....$/gal.......Price........MPG...............Location

    8/25/07.......21,691/(Start)*................................................- - - .................Home
    8/25/07.......22,114/ --.........7.22....$2.769......$20.00......not filled**.........Xenia, Ohio
    8/27/07.......22,334/642.2..13.07....$2.759......$36.05.........31.7............- ....Gas City, IN
    8/29/07.......22,840/505.9...15.24...$2.789......$42.50.........33.2............- ..Mansfield, Ohio
    8/31/07.......23,297/457.6...13.86...$2.569......$35.60.........33.0............- ....Home

    TOTAL/AVG.......1605.7.....49.39.................$134.15.........32.5

    * with full tank
    ** on purpose – thought gas would be cheaper in Indiana
  • Options
    kiawahkiawah Member Posts: 3,666
    Excellent, thanks for the details.

    For discussion purposes, let's assume that you made a 2 gallon error on your last fillup, and didn't fill it up all the way. Even with that additional 2 gallons, you would yield 31.25 mpg. A 2 gallon error the other way, would yield 33.88 mpg.
  • Options
    bearcrkrdbearcrkrd Member Posts: 167
    I know what you are saying. One thing I do is to try like heck to fill to the same point every fill-up. I guess it's called 'topping off'. Takes between 1/2 and 1 3/4 gal.
    I keep track of mpg on every tank. Do have a spike at times. 3-4 mpg up or down from 'normal'. Still, fairly consistent.
    I do the individual tank thing. I've seen posts in different forums where people do their figuring like you; total miles/gallons. Some post their whole yearly figures. Taxes?
    Also, I think Edmunds testers get up over the wheel and GO. They don't [non-permissible content removed]-foot around (like Me) trying to inflate the mpg. They need brakes every 12k ;)
  • Options
    210delray210delray Member Posts: 4,721
    You're welcome. Sure is a pain putting in those "........." to make the columns line up. Too bad the Word table won't translate directly to Edmunds.

    Good point about the hypothetical error. If you rack up enough miles, as phd as been emphasizing, any filling errors get dramatically reduced. This trip also had the advantage of basically the same type of driving over the entire distance.
  • Options
    210delray210delray Member Posts: 4,721
    I think Edmunds did pretty well, mileage wise, with their Camry, because it was a V6.

    What I don't get (and maybe the hosts can enlighten me) is why it was driven in such a short time over the most boring roads (interstates) from LA to Detroit and back. Me, I'd take the back roads and maybe 5 or 6 days to make the trip (one way), even if I had to spend some of my own money. For one thing, Edmunds would have had more info on how the car did on more challenging roads.
  • Options
    patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    That's a great question. Use the email link beside the author's name to ask and let us know what you find out.
  • Options
    bearcrkrdbearcrkrd Member Posts: 167
    I was jumping in without reading earlier posts much. It is great mileage. I think the 6 cyl w/6 spd auto must be a wonderful powerplant. I have read a lot of complaints in the Forums for a variety of supposed problems people encounter with this running gear. On paper it looks like a race car motor that is whisper quiet and gets great mileage. One of the vendors at work had a new '07 LE 4 cyl. I road with them to a different job site a few miles away, let them in to do some work. I thought very highly of that car. Went a couple weeks later to buy one. Ended up with an '06 Sienna CE with the 3.3 six cylinder. It was cheaper than a Camry 4 cyl with the option pkg's I would have wanted. I got 0%, and a year-end price on the Sienna. The Camry's were new model-year at that time.
    I've had 5 new Toyotas since 2001. 215,000 + miles. Not one $ spent on brake work. Just the normal rear brake adjusment every 15,000 or so on the Rear Drum Brakes.
  • Options
    lmacmillmacmil Member Posts: 1,758
    Does anyone have a 4 cyl and V6 Camry from the same generation? Wondering the gas mileage difference, in particular highway, of the 4 vs the 6. Given the variation among different drivers with the same engine, I think the only valid comparison would be from the same driver. I would be particular interested in a comparison to the 3.3 liter V6 in the 2004-2006 SE.
  • Options
    gashuggergashugger Member Posts: 1
    I bought my car 8 months ago and haven't been able to get better than12.8 to 13.8 mpg.Dealer says there is nothing wrong with it ,cause Computer shows no Codes.I think it has a Variable Transmission(they suggested High Octane Gas).Any help will be greatly appreciated !!!!
  • Options
    kiawahkiawah Member Posts: 3,666
    Can you tell us what model you have? (4cyl LE, SE, XLE, or Hybrid). You indicate a 4 cylinder with a Variable Transmisionn, which would indicate that you have a Hybrid model.

    It would be helpful to know what kind of typical driving you do (e.g. 50% stop and go city mileage, 50% highway mileage @ 55-60 mph, etc.). When you drive each day, does the engine get up to normal operating temperature? How would you classify your personal driving style (agressive, typical, conservative).

    Who has suggested high octane gasoline, that is not correct for the 4 cylinder engine, you just want regular as specified in the owners manual.

    That mileage is low, and would be extremely low if you have a Hybrid as indicated by the Variable Transmission.
  • Options
    blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    Your MPG is your route. Give us a typical driving day with starts and stops. Thanks
  • Options
    caazcaaz Member Posts: 209
    Interesting arguments i have been quietly reading. The only way there could be a +1 to -3 ga. error, is if the persone stopped pumping the instant the automatic shut off triggered. If the person tops it off, then there is no error as long as he or she continually tops it off, enough said. I purchased an 03 camry last week, mint condition, only 38,000 miles. I got lucky..... anyway, i did a lil freeway traveling, 74.7 miles to be exact. Re- topped it back off, Oh...btw, i did about 10 miles of that 74.7 in straight city. Filled it up ...exactly 2 ga. on the nose....37 MPG, not bad considering i hear alot of readers complain they get 28 30..etc..Its all how you drive. MY father in law goes from Orange County..to phx to see his son.. 6 mo old Avalon, Always between 33&34mpg, straight freeway...78 mph...
    Last week i took a trip form Orange County to Los Angeles....went 65mph ..cruise control all the way, recieved 33.6 in my 3.3 litre v6 SIenna minivan.. If i can do that in a minivan, the rest of you with 4 cyl toyotas have no excuse other than heavy foot...or city driving not to get better mpg..
    Each week i travel from o.c. to Phx, I'll keep you posted each week with the 400mile trip with my new 03 4 cyl camry.. and ill even sacrifice...lol, i'll try it at 4 diff speeds, instead of the 80 i currently do ... Will report soon, later Cazz
  • Options
    keislkeisl Member Posts: 16
    2007 4cyl Camry

    I know I've tried to tell Toyota there was a problem with my car, but they won't even look at it, because the maintenance light isn't on. I've been asking about it since about June of 06 (I got the car in March of 06). It drives me crazy. When I keep it between 66-74, I've never done better than 28.5MPG on the highway. Driving in town REALLY stinks. I have moved into a tiny town (Under 5 miles to just about anything - more like 2-3) and I get about 16MPG on a good tank of gas (I had one that was about 12MPG - and was seeing red)! I let the car sit for about 30 seconds before driving (as Toyota told me to do), I try to watch my starts and stops and turns. I'm very frustrated by it. That was why I made my first posts to this website, hoping for any help or something from someone else saying they were experiencing the same thing - but all I've heard is rudeness, disbelief, and condemnation - so I only check in ever 4-6 months to see if there is anything new.

    If you have any idea what I can get the dealer to look at the car deeper than the dashboard, let me know, because this just can't be right.

    Thanks for any constructive ideas - otherwise I don't really want to hear how I must be lying or don't know what I'm doing. ;)
  • Options
    blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    If you have a lot of short drives with a cold engine you can get really low mileage. The 28 at 66-74 seems within the normal range to me. Try to link all your errands so that you are driving with a warm engine more often.
  • Options
    acco20acco20 Member Posts: 211
    Have you taken the car to a different dealer for another opinion. I agree, possibly something is not exactly right.....good luck.
  • Options
    lmacmillmacmil Member Posts: 1,758
    Let us know about that 400 mile trip. I don't think anyone would consider a 75 mile trip an accurate measure of mileage. Being off by only .2 gal would change your mileage by 10%.
  • Options
    troylikesbikestroylikesbikes Member Posts: 132
    Thanks for any constructive ideas - otherwise I don't really want to hear how I must be lying or don't know what I'm doing.

    Another poster asked for a few more specifics, which doesn't strike me as thinking you are lying, but sounds helpful.

    You have to understand, quite a few of us have owned more than one or two of these things and in geneal they seem to return excellent mileage.

    Your mileage is so diametrically opposed to our experience we just can't figure out how to attack the problem.

    My first instinct is to rule the driver out as the problem, because he/she is the guy/gal who can effect performance the most. For example, do you drive with both feet in an automatic or just one? This might seem like a crazy question to anyone who was taught to drive automatic with one foot, but my experience is that WAY too many people are resting their left foot on the brake pedal when they drive their automatics. To two footed slushbox drivers, its normal, but to the rest of it, it raises the possibility of the brakes always being activated. Talk about a sure fire way to shoot your gas mileage in the butt!

    Any chance you could loan your car to someone for a trip and see how they do? Assuming the driver isn't the issue, I think there is something physically wrong with your car. I don't know where to start, but if it were me I'd change every filter and fluid, have the brakes checked to make sure they aren't wearing out prematurely because of a mechanical issue which always keeps them on, I'd put the thing up on stands and spin the wheels to make sure there is no anomalies in resistance to free wheeling, heck, nearly everything I could check myself.

    That kind of mileage isn't the norm, but without someone qualified troubleshooting it for you, you are a bit out of luck.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles