Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
30.39 mpg
For this last fill up after coming off the L.A. trip.
I'll now drive the car with mixed freeway commute (1 day a week) and weekend city driving and see how that mileage compares to the old PT Cruiser with automatic. Then I'll switch to all freeway commuting for a week (no weekend city trips) and see how that compares vs. the all-time mileage champ, my stick shift Cobalt.
BTW, this is a lot more car than the Cobalt - I'd call it a midsize vs. a compact, or a "new compact" vs. a "new mini". They are at least a half, if not a full, size different.
28.53 mpg
Took a passenger this time, might have affected mileage. Meanwhile my Cobalt stick shirt returns a consistent 33-34 on my commute (used to be higher but the traffic has gotten heavier and the trip computer indicates my average speed is down to 33 mph).
The Cobalt remains a mileage champ, but the extra quiet and comfort and size of the Caliber make me prefer it. It will be interesting to see the EPA's revised "closer to real world" mileage figures this fall.
31.15 mpg
This is a commute so it has some slow and go stretches plus my surface street stretches to get to and from the freeway (about 1.5 miles on each end).
I am very pleased with this mileage.
For example, I had a 1993 Honda CX, their "low tech" high mileage version that year. Here are some key specs from Edmunds:
2094 pounds;
70 horsepower;
91 pound feet of torque;
42 city mpg, 46 highway mpg
Ok, want to know what kind of mileage I got when I drove between LA and San Francisco? 32 mpg. Pretty disappointing, huh? I can assure that zero, zip, nada has happened between my driving habits then and now - conservative, easy driver.
Want to know my overall LA to San Francisco gas mileage on my 2007 Caliber, which weighs 3089 pounds, has 140 hp, 129 pound feet of torque, side curtain airbags, and a "big" profile (tons of front and rear seat head room and legroom, four doors, bigger hatchback storeage area)? Almost 33 mpg.
So I'd call that progress. I have owned a large variety of economy cars in the last 9 years. A 2003 Civic Coupe stick shift gave me 35 mpg on the same run; but so did a 2006 Chevy Cobalt stick shift, and it was much faster and quieter. I tend to average about 30 mpg on that run, except for a couple of VW Golfs which dropped to 26 mpg due to the low 5th speed gearing, and also a Focus hatchback with auto that got the same mileage (their stick shift hb's returned 30-33 mpg - the current Duratec motors are more efficient).
It's very hard, imho, to hit the really high mileage numbers. Consumers demand quick acceleration, to manufacturers don't gear their products high. Automatics are very inefficient, they recapture part of that with extra tall gearing but it still doesn't make up for friction losses.
In short, the Caliber is, for all intents and purposes a midsize car but matches the fuel economy of the "compact" (more like "mini" compared to today's vehicles) cars of the 90's. To me, that's progress despite all the rants I see.
Instead, mileage came up. The only factors that have changed since my last report are (1) I sometimes accelerate harder, running up the rpm (supposed to use more fuel); (2) I sometimes accelerate harder, but by flooring it in a lower gear (supposed to use less fuel than running up the rpm in a lower gear, since the butterfly valve in the throttle body is in the more efficient, wider open position); (3) the car has 5,000 miles on it; and (4) I changed to full synthetic (Pennzoil Platinum 5-20) vs. semi-synthetic (Motorcraft/Conoco 5-20). From all reports I have read, synthetic oil per se does not increase mileage, but on the other hand different makes tend to fall into slightly different viscoscity ranges (all within the 5-20 spec, though) which may affect mileage, but shouldn't affect it by more than a couple of percent.
Here are the tank by tank numbers. I wouldn't read very much into the tank by tank variations, since I was on the road and obviously unable to follow my "at home" routine of using the same gas station, same pump, same vehicle to pump orientation (levelness affects fill considerably).
32.59 mp - fill up before I hit the road, this represents my normal "commute" mpg, although it is about 1 mpg above average, probably a fill variation.
34.44 mpg at Kettleman City;
35.14 mpg in Burbank after arriving (probably a fill variation, esp. considering the "hill climb" over the mountains on the last stretch into L.A.);
31.32 mpg in Buttonwillow on the drive back (all my L.A. driving was freeway, very little street mixed in, this leg also includes up the mountains and back down to get out of L.A.);
30.28 mpg from Buttonwillow back to SF (this was the highest speed portion of the run, people were maniacs on the way home on Sunday).
Average - 32.75 mpg.
Awfully darn good.
I suspect a stick shift with a 2.0 would match this mileage - the 1.8 is geared necessarily low due to its small displacement. It makes good hp, but only at high rpm. This car simply won't "pull" at low rpm the way my Cobalt with a 2.2 would - on the other hand, the engine is much smoother and rev's very freely. More of a European experience - small displacement, high rpm for performance.
While I would love to have a hybrid, the $$$ wasn't there for it for me. Caliber offered the best bang for buck + decent mileage + versatility I was looking for.
In US MPG I have gotten:
21.49,
23.04,
20.1,
25.22,and
22.85 on my last five fills. All of our driving is in the city. On the occasions when I get it out on the highway, I see the fuel economy shoot up big time. With gas hitting $1.04 per litre here in Canada I was hoping for something a bit better than my Caravan. I not the lighest foot in the world, but I am very far from the heaviest foot too. Other than the milage issue I love this car, just wished I owned a refinery is all.
formulation you should see an increase in mpg.
The CVT if that's what you have for tranny does not like
heavy acceleration,the programming allows rpm
to go up but is set to protect the belt pulley
systems in the CVT from slippage.
If you want better 0-20mph starts use "L" then shift
to "D" at 20-25mph.
Having said that if you drive aggressively the CVT mpg
is about what your getting.
DJP
I read similar post at other site.http://www.carsurvey.org/model_Dodge_Caliber.html
I heard CVT is around 10% better than conventional A/T.
I'm looking forward to seeing your post.
Altho my MPG has been good, it is because I very carefully feather foot. My latest posted MPG updates are on this website for April 15, 2007. Please see for details. With the warming weather & summer mix gas in the last half month, my average MPG has risen another .2 MPG from 29.3 to 29.5MPG. Doesn't sound like much, but I hope my average MPG to be in the low 30's by end of my first year of ownership, late September 2007.
Some people get bad MPG, & blame their cars. We must shoulder some of that blame, be philosophical, & try to feather foot tho. If you really feather foot & get tired of it, then you're not really feather footing. By definition feather footing is being easy on the gas pedal, easy on the planet Earth, easy on your pocketbook, easy on yourself....Zen of the pedal, as one might say. You must love to travel, you must love to look at the planet Earth, you must love those people along the route you travel, you must love to accomplish your aims in life with less fuel consumed. It is more than philosophy, more than Zen...it is Love.
This is the best tank I recorded since buying the car. The car has 11,200 miles on it now.
Way back in my past I was a pizza driver... I know I'm doing everything right for MPG, but average trip-length is a real MPG killer. That is, unless you have a manual transmission, where you can "coast" alot. In my experience, manuals often get much better in-town MPG than automatics.
I'd like to hear from folks with 5-speed Cailbers as soon as possible to see if they are getting the advertised 28 mpg or better in short-trip driving. If the MPG on the 5-speed is better (and it costs $1150 less), I'll have my wife drive the CVT.
farout
performed 2 weeks ago and filled up the tank.
Using Mopar oil/filters with 100% city driving my mpg has gone
from 27 mpg/imp gal to 32.038 mpg/imp gal.
Taking in summer gas blend and warmer temps with 10532 kms/
abt 6200 miles on odo I am happy Caliber owner.
Get the flash!!!!!!!
Just had the PCM re-flashed per the current TSB. I'm not sure if that had any effect on the MPG, but its up-to-date now.
Overall the car is comfortable and keeps the road out well at higher speeds. The only oddity I noticed was that CVT and cruise seem to team up and act as an "engine brake" when descending fairly steep inclines.
As with any car, someone should invent some sort of "smart cruise control" that will maintain MPH, but only up to a user-specified RPM. I could have achieved better MPG in the mountains, if I slowed down to keep the rpm under 3,000 during climbs. With the cruise set at 74-75 MPH, the RPM ran as high as 3800 during steady climbs. I'm sure this was the optimum gear ratio given the specified speed and the grade of the road, but it would have not bothered me if the car's speed dropped a bit to save fuel
For comparison, other cars that i have rented ranged from 29.4 mpg hiway for a V6 Saturn Aura, to 32-33 mpg for 4 cyl. Pontiac G6 & Chevy Malibu.
Not bad since in previus posts around town I was getting about 18.5 mpg.
My only issue is the 2.4 just lacks quick get up and go. At passing speeds it moves very well, but not from a dead start. These 2.4 world engines need some refinement on a quicker start. Other than that we find it has lots of room and is pretty smooth.
farout
done on your Calibers yet?
It applies to any Caliber with a build date before
April 28,2007 and it resolves your complaint regarding
acceleration plus quiets engine with improved mpg.
0-30 mph and resolve the sometime noisey diesel like
sound emanating from the engine at idle or low rpm
acceleration.
A byproduct of the flash is increased mpg as has
been posted on several forums by those having had it
done to their Calibers,my mpg increased by 4mpg
in city driving and 1-2 on hiway and 0-30
acceleration is totally different.
So if you have these traits or concerns it's
up to you to decide how to proceed.
By the way my Caliber SXT 2.0L/CVT was a June 06 build.
With my SE Caliber 2 liter w/CVT, my highway high is 35.6MPG, trips over 4000 foot mountain passes from sea level average 32.8MPG, & my overall average including a miserable winter w/41 tanks of gas is 30.8 MPG. The overall average will continue to rise to 31+ MPG till my first year of ownership, & then colder weather & winter mix gas will lower MPG again like last year. The CVT responds well on steep mountain grades as long as you don't rush thru them. Work to maintain speed thru corners & not have to accelerate hard up slope. Drop your speed. Enjoy the mountains. You will also enjoy your mountain MPG.
using the new mpg formulas.
I think some Caliber owners will be suprised!!!!
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm
Agreed. I just traded a Corolla in good condition and making good mileage, for a Caliber. My express reason was the cargo capacity. The SE w/options that I got was STILL cheaper than a local Matrix, and I was thrilled to only have to give up a few mpg in order to get the cargo capacity I wanted.
I'm only half done with the first tank of gas and in mixed driving in Atlanta am already getting 22.22 mpg. Could be better, but I'm assuming the dealer put gas in right before I bought the car (he knew I was coming, but that's still an assumption) and I don't expect the best mileage until about the third tank. Plus, Atlanta requires A/C use and a certain amount of stop-and-go.
Best mileage ever on my Corolla (which I bought used) was 41 mpg on a highway trip in the winter. But in practical application, lately I'd been getting 28-30. So if I can beat 25 in the Caliber, I'll be satisfied. Because I'm still coming out ahead with respect to cargo capacity and safety features.
I once bought straight on mileage and chose a 1996 Nissan 200SX w/AT (bad back -- I can operate a stick but not if I want to drive more than an hour or so at a time). Using octane booster, at 10K on the Nissan I got 52 mpg on a highway trip. That car was great, but it also had low power and lousy cargo capacity. Times and needs change...
BTW I bought my RT/AWD with 2400K on it...it was a buy-back from Dodge (lemon-law). The disclosure indicated that the "check engine" light came on 3 times and couldn't be fixed...After the buy-back Dodge techs found that the "codes" were wrong and corrected that problem...haven't had a problem since I bought it...13.5K on it now.
How would I know if the latest TSB#18-031-07 was applied? Would I have to take it in to dealer for that or is there another way to find out?
you purchased the car they should have the service
records on file providing it was originally from
their stock.
Check under the hood for a label or sticker that
by DCX procedures should afixed when the car undergoes
a software revision.
It would seem to me that with that mpg on the RT/AWD
it probably has been done, look for other criteria
such as deiseling sound and sluggish acceleration
from starts as outlined in the TSB.
However, what really matters is what mileage it will get on your typical day to day driving.
Took my new Caliber on a road trip last week and had 28, 30, 31, 25 for the mileage. The last tank was mixed and also involved me hauling some things around for a friend.
Typical driving for me is about 60/40 highway vs. town. Latest number was 26.16. For mixed driving as applied to Atlanta (i.e., it's rarely possible to drive for the mpg) I think that's pretty decent.
On road trips I routinely run 30-31. Again, I'm a bit of a featherfoot but only a bit -- yes, I do run 70-75 mph on the Interstate.
These numbers have been remarkably consistent since 1700 miles or so.
You are correct about the MPG. I get up to 24 city and up to 34 highway. I average about 25 mpg for mixed driving.
Many of my previous cars used to get better mpg, but then the EPA was not as strict as it is now.
You should see good traction in snow as I have. The extra ground clearance helps too.
You will like the Caliber as I have. Its been reliable so far(19,000 miles)with no issues.
BMW achieves good fuel economy by optimizing aerodynamics in part by having minimal ground clearance, and the engine requiring premium unleaded, the sign of a higher compression engine. It probably has very expensive engine controls.
I don't mind the fact that my 2.4L 168 hp NA I-5 Volvo V70 (which I got as a hand-me-down) requires premium 91 AKI to achieve EPA 30 mpg highway (I get up to 35 mpg driven carefully on IHs). The compression ratio is over 10:1. But a lot of people in the US begrudge every penny that fuel costs so a requirement for premium fuel in a moderate priced car would be fatal.
What model, engine, and transmission combination do you have?
I am a conservative driver and the vast majority of my miles are highway.
airnos, gordonwd - I am happy to here you both are getting good MPG, just curious about your model /engine/transmission combinations.
Anybody else can jump in too.
I've had my SXT for 1.5 yrs now, have 54K miles on it and just replaced my 17" tires which make the car ride much nicer than 15" tires on other Calibers. I'm consistantly getting 30 mpg on my car with no issues at all. This the best compact car I have ever owned.