EPA Mileage Estimates vs Real World

[timb]

I would like to hear folks experiences regarding their real-world fuel mileage vs. the EPA estimate for their vehicles. I hear over and over and over again how the estimates are ludicrous and even the revised 2008 methods don't reflect real experiences. Bottom line, don't ever expect to get the EPA estimate but at best they may be a rough relative guide between vehicles.

I dunno.

My brother and I are both rather... well "****" when it comes to tracking fuel usage. Both of us have complete records of every drop of gas we've bought for every vehicle we've owned for decades. I got my wife into that habit as well (simple notebook in the glovebox.) None of us is an overly 'conservative' driver - my wife is probably the most sedate driver of the three of us - although that doesn't necessarily translate to a driving approach that maximizes mileage. We're in western PA with urban traffic congestion, plenty of hills, and banzai rush hour highway travel. And 10% ethanol in the summer mix (I think). Yet with every vehicle we've owned, we've beat the EPA 'estimates'. By a lot. And coincidentally by nearly a similar % on every vehicle.

Two examples -

My old 88 Taurus was rated at 21/29 with the old method, EPA rates it at 18/27 under 2008 guidelines. I got 23 pure city and 33 on the highway over the 140,000 miles I drove it. Around 25 mix in my commute.

96 Jeep Cherokee - old rating 15/19, 2008 rating 14/18. I get 16/23 still at 173,000 miles and climbing - 18-19 in my commute.

So I guess that I just cannot fathom how people are driving that they can't even approach the EPA numbers in most vehicles. Do we have some magic touch or do most people simply drive foot to the floor until they need to get on the brakes for the next red light or something?

What bugs me is that it's new vehicle time and I'm trying to 'predict' what I'll likely end up with mileage wise between the various choices. You look at the EPA numbers - and it's easy to find on line complaints on just about any vehicle where the owners can't make those numbers. Some are scary bad. But those same complaints have been going on forever and it just doesn't jive with our experiences.

So - what's in your walllet.. er gas tank?

 

[tallyho8]

Funny thing, when they first started marking the mileages on the cars, they marked city mileage, suburban mileage and highway mileage. The city mileage was so low that the manufacturers complained about having to put it on the stickers and managed to get it removed so that then there was only suburban mileages and highway mileages written on the stickers. After several years they changed the name for the lower mileage back to city mileage but used the same statistics that they had been using for suburban mileage to fool people.

 

[randy41]

i would use the epa mileage numbers for comparison only and otherwise consider them 'ballpark' numbers.

 

[HUCKthe1]

I think the EPA Estimate is just that an educated guess. Some will get better some will get worst depending on load,heavy foot/light foot, speed, and general condition of vehicle.

I too am **** in checking my fuel economy. In general we get the EPA or better. My car was rated at 38mpg in town and 46mpg hwy. I get anywhere from 43 to 52mpg. My average is 48.11mpg for all fuel. Better than the EPA. My wife's car is exactly what the EPA listed for her car to a little worst, but she has a very heavy foot (24 city,28 hwy). I also check tire pressure, change air filter and all other service as needed which might help.

 

[Bird]

I recently read a news article about the change in the way the EPA estimates are done, but I don't remember all the details. The mileage estimates are lower for 2008, although the cars didn't change. It's just that the EPA rated them differently; theoretically rating them the way most people drive, which is faster, quicker acceleration, etc. than the old ratings. I may be off on my numbers, but I think the old city ratings were for something like 20 mph and the highway ratings 45 mph.

And timb, for several years now, I've kept track, not only of the gasoline, but every nickel spent on our vehicles. Instead of a notebook, though, I use a spreadsheet. Of course, both of our current vehicles are 2001 models, neither was bought new, and I don't know what the EPA ratings were. However, the 2001 Windstar SE Sport had 27087 miles on it the day I bought it, had 86070 miles when I filled the gas tank this week, and it's averaged 19.857 mpg since we've owned it. The 2001 Ranger supercab, 4.0L V-6 (biggest engine), automatic, etc. had 36086 miles on it when I bought it, had 54118 miles on it when I filled the gas tank this week, and has averaged 18.777 mpg since we've owned it. While we do a little highway driving, we're mostly suburban driving and mileage gets a bit worse in the summer with the air-conditioners running and better in the winter without the air-conditioners running. And of course, if I wait on my wife to run in a store, I leave the engine running and the air-conditioner going when the weather's hot, but shut down and open a window when it's cool.

 

[timnjaneb]

Our 2005 Aveo was rated at 26 City and 34 Hwy. Early on it seemed like we would never make either one of these. By the time we had 1.5K miles on it the short (2 miles) drives to work was meeting or just exceeding the 26MPG.
At 14,500 miles we just completed a 1000 mile round trip to MO. Very happy to report 36MPG. This included some stop and go along with 70 to 75 MPH by our son who was in a hurry to get home from 6 months of military life.
Tim

 

[czechsonofagun]

...Both of us have complete records of every drop of gas we've bought for every vehicle we've owned for decades. I got my wife into that habit as well

Well I am glad I am not the only one
Can't remember how many hours I spent with the data - after typing them in spreadsheet - statistically analyzing it.

I can confirm the Taurus, our 95 wagon had a surprisingly good mileage. My daily driver is 86CJ7, 6 inline and on my work commute I get consistenly 17.8 miles per gallon.

 

[MikePA]

What bugs me is that it's new vehicle time and I'm trying to 'predict' what I'll likely end up with mileage wise between the various choices.

Isn't this exactly how the EPA estimates are supposed to be used?

Since the EPA tests all the vehicles in the same way, comparing EPA mpg estimates is valid, whereas extrapolating EPA figures to real world is not, unless you drive the way they test.

 

[dubba]

I am surprised that you haven't been able to tell if you have the 10% ethanol mixed in there.. My civic has dropped from 46mpg to 44mpg since the introduction of the 10% ethanol in NH.

To answer the question, yes I notice the EPA estimate to be low. The civic was rated for 38 highway in 2002, I have consistently gotten 40mpg in the winter & 46 in the summer until the ethanol.

P.S. for those super retentive numbers people-

Can you tell by looking at the stats how much tread was left on your tires at any particular time?

 

[tallyho8]

Most odometers I have checked lately seem fairly accurate but the automakers used to have odometers say about 5% more than your actual mileage. This made your gas mileage look better and your warranty run out faster.