Official: What are your real world MPG Numbers

zippypcs

zippypcs

Site Supporter
I just returned from a 2000 mile round trip. Running 93 octane.

A/C on both ways. And most of the time in Alabama as it was sticky hot.

About 1750 freeway miles @ 70 mph. The other 250 miles running around doing stuff.

Average for my trip was 38.5 mpg.

Trip down got 41.8 mpg on freeway. Michigan to Alabama.

Had two people and rear seat and hatch area loaded to top of seats.

Run my tires @ 40 psi as always.

Most of the time when here at home going to work mpg at around 36.
 
W

warthog312

New member
My 2012 LT hatch 1.4t6m just turned 36,000. I'm averaging a display 26mpg and a calculated around 25. It kind of sucks because I bought this car to save me on fuel, but admittedly I drive 95% Chicago city traffic. My daily commute is about 7 miles each way, and it takes no less than an hour in traffic. This is also my work use vehicle so I sit in traffic all day on my way to meet clients.
 
H

hkaep

New member
I reset my month-old MPG gauge twice.

After the first time, it was 34.4

Now it's around 36-38.

90% city.

1700 miles.
1.8L
Sedan
 
B

ben416

Member
I average 38mpg on 91-93 with a Trifecta tune on my 1.4T 6MT.

I've gotten up to 43.8 and that is not the DIC number, that is a manual calculation. The DIC said I was getting 47mpg that tank. I reset it every time I fill up.

No highway driving except the occasional weekend, all the roads are 50mph or less around here.
 
S

shorebreeze

Member
warthog312 said:
My 2012 LT hatch 1.4t6m just turned 36,000. I'm averaging a display 26mpg and a calculated around 25. It kind of sucks because I bought this car to save me on fuel, but admittedly I drive 95% Chicago city traffic. My daily commute is about 7 miles each way, and it takes no less than an hour in traffic. This is also my work use vehicle so I sit in traffic all day on my way to meet clients.
Click to expand...

I think that's pretty reasonable for Chicago traffic. I've had 26-27 in mixed city street/grocery run/"express"way driving and as low as 19 when inching down Milwaukee Avenue with the AC on in horrible traffic in beastly heat, all because there was a wreck on the highway, on my 1.4/auto sedan. These numbers are roughly comparable with my 5-speed manual Prizm that I traded in, so for a 300 pound heavier car with an automatic, it's not too bad -- and it slightly beats the Prizm on the highway, the longer top gear overcoming the extra weight. The 6MT has a further advantage still. I think if you drive carefully you might be able to get the numbers up a bit; one thing I noticed before settling on the automatic is that the gearing on the manual Sonic narrows the rather awkward gap on the Prizm between 3rd and 4th, so combined with the turbo torque you've got excellent gearing for that 20-30mph range that Chicago is stuck in, in between traffic lights and freeway wrecks, whereas the Prizm wanted to be in the low 20s (in third) or the upper 30s (in fourth) but not in between.
 
Last edited:
S

shorebreeze

Member
ben416 said:
I average 38mpg on 91-93 with a Trifecta tune on my 1.4T 6MT.

I've gotten up to 43.8 and that is not the DIC number, that is a manual calculation. The DIC said I was getting 47mpg that tank. I reset it every time I fill up.

No highway driving except the occasional weekend, all the roads are 50mph or less around here.
Click to expand...

How did you find the tune affected your average? It seems to me your peak is what I'd expect to get on mine (a turbo 6 auto) if the 6th gear was as long as it is on the manual, so what I'm wondering is if you simply saw improved performance, or if you have also seen efficiency improvements?
 
B

ben416

Member
shorebreeze said:
How did you find the tune affected your average? It seems to me your peak is what I'd expect to get on mine (a turbo 6 auto) if the 6th gear was as long as it is on the manual, so what I'm wondering is if you simply saw improved performance, or if you have also seen efficiency improvements?
Click to expand...
I had one tank at 41.5mpg (manual calculation) before the tune. While I think it helps a little, it is not huge, and all you have to do is get on it a few times in performance mode to wipe out any mpg savings. lol

That being said, I had a 1.4t auto sedan as a loaner while mine was being worked on. It seemed to average 2-5mpg less than my tuned 6mt sonic.
 
S

shorebreeze

Member
ben416 said:
I had one tank at 41.5mpg (manual calculation) before the tune. While I think it helps a little, it is not huge, and all you have to do is get on it a few times in performance mode to wipe out any mpg savings. lol

That being said, I had a 1.4t auto sedan as a loaner while mine was being worked on. It seemed to average 2-5mpg less than my tuned 6mt sonic.
Click to expand...

Interesting; the 2 makes sense but the 5 suggests different driving.

One thing of note is that the non-RS automatic has very different gearing from the non-RS turbo manual; first and reverse are quite a bit lower geared than on the manual, 2 through 5 are very proportionally (logarithmically) spaced, and 6 is slightly lower, by about seven or eight percent, than the manual, tipping the balance of "optimal spot for the engine" vs "longest possible gearing." At times it will be in 6th gear as low as 40 mph, though, so the auto can be a benefit in suburban driving. The manual has that longer first gear, 2 through 4 do the work of 2 through 5 on the auto, and then there are effectively two overdrive gears. Not that the auto wants to be left out of the economizing; even the stock tune will put the transmission into 6th at a little over 40mph given light enough action on the right foot. You'd not have the 6MT in 6th at that speed, but 5th is very realistic, whereas it wouldn't be in a lot of non-turbo small cars.

During the first 1,500 miles, I found the highway performance creeping up with AC on from about 36mpg to around 40, 41 at 70mph. Part of this gain was probably break-in, part of it was me getting used to the car. This was on typically crappy Midwestern ethanol-addled 87 octane gas. I think the manual would be across the board two to three mpg better. I also believe 93 octane would help. Note that I drive relatively conservatively though, and will turn the cruise off in hilly country, allowing the car to gain speed on the downhill and lose it on the uphill.
 
AdorableKaren

AdorableKaren

Asian Elite
Proud of my auto sonic RS :)

image.jpg
 
ChicksHateMe

ChicksHateMe

Member
It's been 6 months of ownership and "IF" I keep trying to figure out my MPG's any longer, I am going to need a weeks vacation in the local psych ward. :) There are some consistencies, but not enough to give a set number to ANYTHING....

I live in New England. A nice Hilly Area in Northern Mass. I can get in the 60's if I go DOWN to one town. I can get in the 30's coming home. I can get in the low 20's racing around town to get things done. Or High 20's if I am driving around town, but relaxed. And if I have to wait for someone, I don't watch the clock, I watch the MPG's go down as the engine sips away at them.

I do have some fun trying to set new "Highs" on my highway rides. and I do notice a difference with fill-ups at different gas stations. I even think I noticed the MPG's better after my first oil change. But I don't seem to notice much difference between the 87 octane and 93 octane. I do the 93 every once in a while, though. Not sure why... Influenced by the "Cleaner" propaganda I suppose....

But I've gone insane trying to mash all the variables together to figure out my MPG's and how to squeak out more. Fuelly tells me if I could save $3.61 per tank and get an extra 30.8 Extra Miles if I can squeak out another +3 MPG. It's just too much pressure for my lil, Male Brain.

To get my sanity back, I am just going to drive her hard and enjoy the ride with just a little guilt about my sinful waste.
 
MaD

MaD

Member
I just got my car on 8-6-14, dealer did a fill up and 11 miles on the car, my first tank gave me 254 miles, my 2nd tank only gave me 222 (really hot days AC always on). So the AC really makes a huge difference in MPG from what I can tell, so as soon as winter starts Im sure Ill get a lot higher numbers. Either way, the car is lots of fun to drive :D

1.4 LT Turbo AT w/spring promo package
 
94383Z71

94383Z71

New member
shorebreeze said:
One thing of note is that the non-RS automatic has very different gearing from the non-RS turbo manual; first and reverse are quite a bit lower geared than on the manual, 2 through 5 are very proportionally (logarithmically) spaced, and 6 is slightly lower, by about seven or eight percent, than the manual, tipping the balance of "optimal spot for the engine" vs "longest possible gearing." At times it will be in 6th gear as low as 40 mph, though, so the auto can be a benefit in suburban driving. The manual has that longer first gear, 2 through 4 do the work of 2 through 5 on the auto, and then there are effectively two overdrive gears. Not that the auto wants to be left out of the economizing; even the stock tune will put the transmission into 6th at a little over 40mph given light enough action on the right foot. You'd not have the 6MT in 6th at that speed, but 5th is very realistic, whereas it wouldn't be in a lot of non-turbo small cars.
Click to expand...

I don't know about the difference in the first gears, but you can definitely have the 6MT in 6th at 40. I put mine in 6th at 45 and let myself cruise down to 40 with it. It'll dig itself out if you're not in a hurry, although I usually am so I kick it to fifth, as I imagine the computer does with the auto as well.
 
ChrisJ

ChrisJ

Active member
94383Z71 said:
I don't know about the difference in the first gears, but you can definitely have the 6MT in 6th at 40. I put mine in 6th at 45 and let myself cruise down to 40 with it. It'll dig itself out if you're not in a hurry, although I usually am so I kick it to fifth, as I imagine the computer does with the auto as well.
Click to expand...

I'm in 5th by 30mph and 6th by 35-40mph often.


The only benefit of a 1.4 auto is if you want your engine always taching 500-1500 rpm higher, at least that's all I saw in the Cruze loaner I had compared to our 6M Cruze.

My 1.4's pull fine at 1500 rpm, the auto always insisted on downshifting to get 2500-3k under the same conditions. In fact if I had never driven them with a manual the auto gave the impression that the 1.4 has no low rpm power at all and always wants to scream. Completely the opposite from how I drive my manuals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 60 (members: 2, guests: 58)

Share this page

Top