Notices
Scion xB 1st-Gen Owners Lounge
First Generation 2004-2006.5 [NCP31]

for the people not getting their EPA mpg

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 7, 2005 | 12:46 AM
  #1  
Chimmy3's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 745
From: New York
Default for the people not getting their EPA mpg

http://money.cnn.com/2004/09/02/pf/autos/epa/index.htm

I get close... most times under... but its winter... I'm hoping it gets better in the summer
Old Mar 7, 2005 | 01:57 AM
  #2  
Derk-xB's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 295
From: Hood River, OR
Default

Good find! Very interesting article.

So far, I've averaged 31.3 mpg. All city, no interstate. I just installed an Injen intake, so we'll see if/how the milage changes.

Thanks again for the article!
Old Mar 7, 2005 | 03:35 PM
  #3  
Cockpit_XB's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Admin Emeritus
SL Member
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 369
From: Northridge, CA
Default

i've always been wondering why i havent been getting the correct mpg that they std i should be getting....very interest find.
Old Mar 7, 2005 | 04:07 PM
  #4  
Soon2HaveAbox's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 57
From: Jacksonville, FL
Default

Great Find! Based on that, the mileage I am getting is dead on.
Old Mar 7, 2005 | 05:08 PM
  #5  
ugly_duck's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Club One
SL Member
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 819
From: Nebraska
Default

good info
Old Mar 7, 2005 | 09:08 PM
  #6  
Tyler_Knight's Avatar
Member
10 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 41
From: So. Cal.
Default

With a HP/weight ratio almost identical to the Xb, I find it interesting that the Mini Cooper is getting a lot of the same complaints regarding EPA mileage.

http://www.motoringfile.com/2004/10/...cient_in_class


Tends to confirm the article you mentioned.
Old Mar 7, 2005 | 09:41 PM
  #7  
Joehnn's Avatar
Senior Member

10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 882
From: Rolling Meadows, IL
Default

I get 25 mpg, on average. But, I drive 80mph on my daily commute.
Old Mar 8, 2005 | 03:18 AM
  #8  
shadowxB's Avatar
Junior Member
5 Year Member
Scikotics
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2
Default

So far so good.

1st tank: 34.5 mpg in mostly highway condition, 55-70 mph.


knock on wood.
Old Mar 8, 2005 | 03:33 AM
  #9  
hotbox05's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member

SL Member
Team N.V.S.
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 13,706
From: Sacramento, CA / Nor*Cal
Default

Man somepeople get the good mpg cars i got the higher hp car. oh well.
Old Mar 8, 2005 | 04:06 AM
  #10  
scion_tC's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 266
Default

i was reading here that ppl were averaging about 31+, then i was like what the hell I'm only gettin 23 in my tC, then I realized i was in the xB forums...
Old Mar 8, 2005 | 04:06 AM
  #11  
ScionxR's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 340
Default

To everyone complaining about the morale and attidue on the site going downhill, i must say a big thank you to Chimy3 for posting the link. It was very informative and a help. More people need to follow in his example and make this site better for all users. Once again, thanks Chimmy3, now i know why i get about 25-30mpg and i dont feel bad about it now.
Old Mar 8, 2005 | 06:45 PM
  #12  
superjeer's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
Team ScioNRG
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,140
From: Elmira, NY
Default

35*.85=~30MPG Well, there you have it.

So then this begs another question to be asked. Why has fuel efficiency gone down so much over the last 10-15 years?

I had a '87 nova with a 1.6L that got 42MPG (well over EPA). A '95 Contour 2.0L that got 36MPG (again, well over EPA, heavier car and more HP). 1997 Safari, I got exactly EPA on that.

I personally think they are trying to get too much out of too little displacement wise and it's adversely effecting mileage. A little bigger engine that can more easily achieve higher HP and esp Torque numbers would move the box with less strain/revs. I dunno. I'm willing to have them shoehorn a big engine in mine if they'd like to test my theory ;-)
Old Mar 8, 2005 | 07:41 PM
  #13  
SOBAY310's Avatar
Member
10 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 47
From: Redondo Beach, CA
Default

I just did my second fill up at the 444 mile mark and I calculated that I'm getting 25.8 mpg (100% city driving, stop and go). I see posts on here that this increases during the first couple of thousand miles for the "break in period". We'll see.
Old Mar 8, 2005 | 07:59 PM
  #14  
Rion's Avatar
Banned
SL Member
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 396
From: Phoenix, AZ
Default

Originally Posted by superjeer
35*.85=~30MPG Well, there you have it.

So then this begs another question to be asked. Why has fuel efficiency gone down so much over the last 10-15 years?
Because Americans are obsessed with horsepower and big SUVs. Every time a little advancement is made in fuel economy, they use it to make more powerful engines. They eliminate the 4 cylinder optional engines, or make them so hard to get or unappealing that nearly everyone opts for the 6.

Meanwhile in Europe they have high performance diesels that rival gas cars for performance, outclass them in torque and longevity and get 30-50 mpg.

Instead we get a handful of hybrids, none of which can come close to living up to their claimed MPG (my Jetta TDI regularly exceeded the EPA estimate of 49 mpg)

It's a function of our culture. Bigger, better, faster, more.

Until the government gets serious about fuel economy and the environment (chance of that under a Republican administration = ZERO) nothing will change.

Very few Americans care about driving a vehicle that is socially responsible, only way you are going to compel the SUV driving idiots into fuel thrifty wagons is by raising the price of gasoline $1+ a gallon. I'm all for that if it means less a$$holes in SUVs on the roads.
Old Mar 9, 2005 | 01:35 AM
  #15  
Davestoaster's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 506
From: McDonald, PA
Default

Originally Posted by Rion
Originally Posted by superjeer
35*.85=~30MPG Well, there you have it.

So then this begs another question to be asked. Why has fuel efficiency gone down so much over the last 10-15 years?
Because Americans are obsessed with horsepower and big SUVs. Every time a little advancement is made in fuel economy, they use it to make more powerful engines. They eliminate the 4 cylinder optional engines, or make them so hard to get or unappealing that nearly everyone opts for the 6.

Meanwhile in Europe they have high performance diesels that rival gas cars for performance, outclass them in torque and longevity and get 30-50 mpg.

Instead we get a handful of hybrids, none of which can come close to living up to their claimed MPG (my Jetta TDI regularly exceeded the EPA estimate of 49 mpg)

It's a function of our culture. Bigger, better, faster, more.

Until the government gets serious about fuel economy and the environment (chance of that under a Republican administration = ZERO) nothing will change.

Very few Americans care about driving a vehicle that is socially responsible, only way you are going to compel the SUV driving idiots into fuel thrifty wagons is by raising the price of gasoline $1+ a gallon. I'm all for that if it means less a$$holes in SUVs on the roads.
Rion, you seem to have some insight. I agree with your post. Don't worry, you may get your wish soon. I'm seeing articles that the fuel price might hit $3.00 this summer. Then our boxxes will look alot nicer to people!!

With all the men and women dying in Iraq, the only socially responsible thing to do would be to drive a fuel efficient car. But as you say, under a Republican administration, it won't change. As long as we drive a economy car (the xB), we are better Americans than someone who drives a Hummer.
Old Mar 9, 2005 | 04:06 AM
  #16  
MussBus's Avatar
Banned
Scikotics
SL Member
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 88
From: Kennewick, Washington
Default

has anyone tried putting that tornado thing into their intake i have heard great things about it in other cars! I geuss it works wonders and only costs roughly 75 bucks
Old Mar 9, 2005 | 04:31 AM
  #17  
joshtravis's Avatar
Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 67
From: Brighton, TN
Default

I have the tornado thingy in my car. My brother wanted me to try it. I didn't notice anything change when it was put in, but I left it in anyways.
Old Mar 9, 2005 | 05:51 AM
  #18  
hnefrdo's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 887
Default

ohhh. so that's why i keep on getting around 26 MPG.
Old Mar 9, 2005 | 01:45 PM
  #19  
MussBus's Avatar
Banned
Scikotics
SL Member
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 88
From: Kennewick, Washington
Default

really??? no change what so ever? thats odd so far everyone has seen results with other cars! Anybody else have this?
Old Mar 9, 2005 | 02:43 PM
  #20  
BigBaby's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 409
From: The Chi
Default

hey ya'll,

there have been stories ALL week on the local news here in Chicago stating that the testing for fuel mileage is out of date and the numbers are usually false in real life driving.

I get 27-29 now, but with it being winter I let my baby warm up, plus i likes a warm car too, so I know i'm wasting gas. And, my driving style is a little quick so I burn gas that way too.

But, seeing that I was used to 22 - 25 with previous vehicles this is right on the money and I know it'll get better in the summer as it doesn't get so hot you really need the a/c on much of the time.



All times are GMT. The time now is 03:02 AM.