Official: What are your real world MPG Numbers
- Thread starter Sonic-Mike
- Start date
ScooterMcTavish
New member
For the UK they would be - same as our Canuck gallons.
An Imperial Gallon is 1.2 US gallons. Therefore, he's claiming 46 MPG US in town, and 65 MPG US on the Motorways.
However, makes sense based on the following (remembering the Sonic is the Aveo in the UK):
In the U.S., the highest mpg available on the Sonic is 40 mpg and that is the optional 1.4-liter turbocharged engine, which we have our doubts if any normal driver can actually hit 40 mpg in this car. In the U.K., the Aveo has several four-cylinder engine options, including a 1.2-liter gasoline, 1.3-liter diesel, 1.3-liter Eco Diesel, and a 1.4-liter. The highway fuel economy on these engines is 68.9 mpg, 83.1 mpg, 85.6 mpg, and 62.7 mpg, respectively.
Source: Chevrolet Sonic - Top Speed
As long as us dumb-a**es in NA think that we're getting good economy, we'll keep getting the cars we get.
When I went to the UK in 2011, I was paying GBP1.40/L for gas, or roughly US$7.94/US Gal. Most common car I saw on the road? This:
An Imperial Gallon is 1.2 US gallons. Therefore, he's claiming 46 MPG US in town, and 65 MPG US on the Motorways.
However, makes sense based on the following (remembering the Sonic is the Aveo in the UK):
In the U.S., the highest mpg available on the Sonic is 40 mpg and that is the optional 1.4-liter turbocharged engine, which we have our doubts if any normal driver can actually hit 40 mpg in this car. In the U.K., the Aveo has several four-cylinder engine options, including a 1.2-liter gasoline, 1.3-liter diesel, 1.3-liter Eco Diesel, and a 1.4-liter. The highway fuel economy on these engines is 68.9 mpg, 83.1 mpg, 85.6 mpg, and 62.7 mpg, respectively.
Source: Chevrolet Sonic - Top Speed
As long as us dumb-a**es in NA think that we're getting good economy, we'll keep getting the cars we get.
When I went to the UK in 2011, I was paying GBP1.40/L for gas, or roughly US$7.94/US Gal. Most common car I saw on the road? This:
GeneralZod
New member
Things I have noticed driving in winter temps. My normal commute of 40 miles one way. Around 10 miles city and 30 miles highway driving 65-70 mph.
10-20*F: 31mpg
21-30*F: 33mpg anything under 25F and 31 mpg
31-40*F: 34mpg
41-50*F: 36mpg
51-60*F: 38mpg
There are other conditions like humidity and other factors that influence mpg. However, this is what I have observed in the last few months. My fuelly has taken a nose dive because of the 3 weeks of very cold weather. I also noticed if I reset my the DIC each round trip and average that it is very close to dead on. Not sure why. If you have a decent commute reset your mpg avg note the average in the morning. Then on your way back reset again. If you have AM temps in the 20s and PM in the upper 40s it will look like your mpg meter is off because of the difference. Under 40F and it seems there is little you can do to increase your mpg. Over 40F and it almost seems like you can do no wrong.
I might test an upper grille block next tank. Next week the temp range will be 20-47F. So a good week to test to see how effective. I will guess a 1 to 2% increase due to engine bay temps being higher. The available power under 40F is great, but way too much fuel is used for even basic driving.
10-20*F: 31mpg
21-30*F: 33mpg anything under 25F and 31 mpg
31-40*F: 34mpg
41-50*F: 36mpg
51-60*F: 38mpg
There are other conditions like humidity and other factors that influence mpg. However, this is what I have observed in the last few months. My fuelly has taken a nose dive because of the 3 weeks of very cold weather. I also noticed if I reset my the DIC each round trip and average that it is very close to dead on. Not sure why. If you have a decent commute reset your mpg avg note the average in the morning. Then on your way back reset again. If you have AM temps in the 20s and PM in the upper 40s it will look like your mpg meter is off because of the difference. Under 40F and it seems there is little you can do to increase your mpg. Over 40F and it almost seems like you can do no wrong.
I might test an upper grille block next tank. Next week the temp range will be 20-47F. So a good week to test to see how effective. I will guess a 1 to 2% increase due to engine bay temps being higher. The available power under 40F is great, but way too much fuel is used for even basic driving.
GeneralZod
New member
Crude attempt but it allowed coolant temps to get up to normal range.
I was going to prototype with cardboard and black duct tape. Notice a real world difference?
mitdr774
also a dinner prick
cardboard with vinyl on the front and foil tape on the back. economy has been so crappy due to weather lately that i dont have a good comparison. my temps went back to the normal 219-222 range compared to the 210 range they had dropped to. What I may do if i get the chance is to make a 100-150 mile run with it on and then repeat the run with it off.
RichieRocket
New member
mitdr774, clean looking grille blocker! Much nicer than my hack job...
Last winter I tried to test the mpg effect of the upper grille blocker. It's really tough to accurately/consistently test a very small 1-2% improvement. http://www.sonicownersforum.com/forum/t1032/ post #10
Doing a back-to-back, using the cruise control resume to make sure the tests are at the same speed. I got a 0.6 mpg improvement... (recently people have noticed CC resume speed creep up, so that may be a problem)
Testing over a full tank introduces all kinds of variables, temperature changes, average speeds, traffic changes, could vary significantly...
Last year I was worried about blocking the lower grille because of the I/C. But I was thinking, many older turbo cars never even had an I/C, and I rarely go over 3-4 psi boost anyway. If the intake air does get too hot because of the I/C being blocked, the engine computer will do what it needs to do to protect teh engine.
So this winter I have the lower grille 100% blocked off with duct tape. The upper grille blocker has a 1.5" x 5" hole in the lower center.
Right now, I'm doing the 93 vs. 87 test for myself. I just got thru 4 tanks of 93, now running 87, I'll see if I can back up what people have said about 93 paying for itself with 2-3 mpg gain...
Last winter I tried to test the mpg effect of the upper grille blocker. It's really tough to accurately/consistently test a very small 1-2% improvement. http://www.sonicownersforum.com/forum/t1032/ post #10
Doing a back-to-back, using the cruise control resume to make sure the tests are at the same speed. I got a 0.6 mpg improvement... (recently people have noticed CC resume speed creep up, so that may be a problem)
Testing over a full tank introduces all kinds of variables, temperature changes, average speeds, traffic changes, could vary significantly...
Last year I was worried about blocking the lower grille because of the I/C. But I was thinking, many older turbo cars never even had an I/C, and I rarely go over 3-4 psi boost anyway. If the intake air does get too hot because of the I/C being blocked, the engine computer will do what it needs to do to protect teh engine.
So this winter I have the lower grille 100% blocked off with duct tape. The upper grille blocker has a 1.5" x 5" hole in the lower center.
Right now, I'm doing the 93 vs. 87 test for myself. I just got thru 4 tanks of 93, now running 87, I'll see if I can back up what people have said about 93 paying for itself with 2-3 mpg gain...
ungawd
New member
I have had my lower grill covered with black duck tape for the past month. The car definately warms up to operating temperature sooner. My commute is 49mi one way and estimate blocking the grill at just under 1mpg. Rough guess would be about (.7mpg) based on the month prior (36.2 now, 35.5 then).
mitdr774
also a dinner prick
Without knowing when and how often the cooling fan is on, i have been hesitant to block off the lower as well.
My upper was a quick "prototype" to see if I could get my temps back to normal. It worked. The plan will be to eventually make a much better one out of a more durable material. I am thinking that Corex will be my best bet. Once again, black vinyl on the outside and foil tape on the inside. It is held on with some velcro strip that goes around a couple slats in the grill. I should probably get to work on that the next time it warms up a little. I doubt the cardboard base material will last to much longer.
My upper was a quick "prototype" to see if I could get my temps back to normal. It worked. The plan will be to eventually make a much better one out of a more durable material. I am thinking that Corex will be my best bet. Once again, black vinyl on the outside and foil tape on the inside. It is held on with some velcro strip that goes around a couple slats in the grill. I should probably get to work on that the next time it warms up a little. I doubt the cardboard base material will last to much longer.
GeneralZod
New member
I did the 93vs87, and 93 wins everywhere. However, I found alternating from 87 to 93 has the best results in mpg and cost per mile. Yeah, way nerdy and anal but true. In the winter I am doing 2 tanks of 87 followed by a tank of 93. In the summer I will reverse this.
Another tidbit, I fill up with 2 to 3.5 gallons left. To rid any benefits of the 93 a tweeter tank is needed. I found that out after Sand. Many stations only had 87. Tanks 4 and 5 of straight 87 and it was an easy 1.5 mpg loss.
I am going to make a 1/2 inch black plexi upper and lower. Two three inch holes on the lower should be enough. I do mostly highway, and I know the wind ripping in there is killing my mpg.
.7 to 1 mpg is was I estimated in my calculations. So I wasn't far off, while for mpg it is also for the health of the engine. The over fueling kills.
ScooterMcTavish
New member
Ugh - Last Fuelly fill, I didn't have the DIC to work off of, as I reset it a few times to see how I was doing. However, it was an odder drive, with much more city driving than I normally do. Although 1/2 of the fuel was burned in the 20F range, the other half was in much colder temperatures.
For example, I did actually let the car idle for a few minutes this AM as I had to go on the highway right away. Temperature was -22F, -40F with the windchill.
This tank, about 18.2 US MPG. And this driving with fuel savings in mind.
Even sadder when I got about 20 MPG under similar conditions with my 3.4L V6 Alero.
For example, I did actually let the car idle for a few minutes this AM as I had to go on the highway right away. Temperature was -22F, -40F with the windchill.
This tank, about 18.2 US MPG. And this driving with fuel savings in mind.
Even sadder when I got about 20 MPG under similar conditions with my 3.4L V6 Alero.
Last edited:
dvn
New member
Yeah, all I've been doing is short trips lately. Think I'm averaging high 20's. But I have not been babying it either.
Turbo Lover
New member
First fill-up netted 34.9 calculated MPG. Car had 16 mpg on the computer for the first 35 miles due to being at a dealership on a state highway that runs through the city that is down to 1 lane with construction, drove it home alternating between 55 and 65 mph for about 75 miles, drove through downtown for 20 miles last night, drove through downtown for about 35 miles tonight, with about 40 miles on the interstate going 50-55 between last night and tonight. 1.4 6MT. After filling up and resetting the avg mpg, I got 42.1 driving 35 for two miles with the CC on and stopping at one red light and turning right at another red light. I am quite impressed so far, and the MPG is actually making me want the Trifecta tune more than the increase in power!
