Topic: Real-world fuel consumption

[ktm525]

I do drive currently drive like a grampa.  I don't how low it will last until I start tailgating people and buy stickers for my political views.   God help me.

F Trudeau sticker FTW. 

[KD]

My Frontier was averaging 14.1L/100 last time I checked.  Mostly short trips and some towing as well.  Rarely gets driven further than 50km at a time, and that's a long trip.  Did lots of back and forth runs a couple of months ago when we were moving, and a few with a 20' cargo trailer attached.  Not bad, but not great either.  My F-150 was 12.9 last time I looked but it was only a few months old at the time and mostly all highway. 

[rrocket]

Thank you Doug Ford for easing the pain at the pump!

https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/doug-ford-to-extend-ontario-gas-tax-cut-until-end-of-2024-1.6820643

[WP v3.32]

Thank you Doug Ford for easing the pain at the pump!

https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/doug-ford-to-extend-ontario-gas-tax-cut-until-end-of-2024-1.6820643

Yeah I heard that on the radio this morning.

[ktm525]

Ridgeline. Average speed 125 km/h. DMV2 Blizzaks at 32 psi. . 12.2L/100km   Skiing run, into the mountains and back. A couple prolonged grades. Moderate winds. Average speed 125 km/h. About 19 MPG. Yup that is what the sticker says.

[rrocket]

Ridgeline. Average speed 125 km/h. DMV2 Blizzaks at 32 psi. . 12.2L/100km   Skiing run, into the mountains and back. A couple prolonged grades. Moderate winds. Average speed 125 km/h. About 19 MPG. Yup that is what the sticker says.

Not bad, all data considered. IMO.

[ktm525]

Yup to punch a square face through the wind above 120 km/h is never pretty. I have never looked but I bet the Ridgeline's cD is higher than a same pilot due to the open bed.

[Gurgie]

Yup to punch a square face through the wind above 120 km/h is never pretty. I have never looked but I bet the Ridgeline's cD is higher than a same pilot due to the open bed.

I managed 10.6 yesterday with the Passport going to Tremblant & back (~340km round trip) with 3 adults on board and ski gear. Took the roof box off, so the skis were in the back with one seat folded. Speed was 125 km/h in the 100 zones and then 110 km/h in the 90 zones. Still running the winter tires as well. Big difference was the roof box, easily shaved off 2L/100km.

[ktm525]

Sounds about right with both of us on winter gas.

Even though I own one I am not a fan of ski boxes and avoid them whenever humanly possible.. Sometimes they can't be avoided but with the viscous winds coming off the mountains they can be sketchy. At a certain point near a place called lac des arc (near where Heli lives) we had a ski rack full of skis bolted to the trunk of an old Chrysler New Yorker. The wind ripped the trunk off and the skis/rack hit the ditch. The K2 KVCs were ok.     I bet the winds were 80-90 km/h with gusts in the triple digits. No fun .

and then there are the 100 km/h crosswinds on the way to Fernie.. Those are no fun either. Worst I had it there was fortunately in the G8 which had lower side profile. It's Ridgeline > LR4 on the windy days.

https://driving.ca/auto-news/news/watch-high-winds-in-alberta-wreak-havok-tip-over-semi-truck

[warp]

Now that the  ICE Grand Highlander is beyond it's initial break in period, I have been monitoring it's fuel consumption. The other day on a trip to London on the 401 at typically 120 kmph with occasional bursts beyond for overtaking I got 9.5 l/100 km, slightly better than the NRCan combined rating of 10 l/100 km. The equivalent hybrid trim has a combined rating of 7.0 l/100 km but has a price delta of $4000 + tax.  The increased consumption of the ICE at 2.5 l/100 km is equivalent ~$40 per 1000 km at a gas price of $1.60/liter. So if I were to have got a hybrid (I am discounting the year long waiting period), I would have broken even at about ~100,000 km, assuming gas prices stay flat....

On another note, I have also monitored the fuel consumption of the GLI, now that is also past it's break in period. Highway cruising at 120 with occasional burst beyond is returning about 7.2 l/100 km, with a best of 6.7 l/100 km, against an NRCan highway rating of 6.5 l/100 km. Not bad at all for a 2.0 liter, 228 hp/258 lb/ft torque engine with the DSG.

The GH is on all seasons and the GLI on winters.

[tortoise]

$40/1000 km is only true if you're doing mostly highway driving.  I'd be curious to know the difference if someone does mostly city driving.

[warp]

$40/1000 km is only true if you're doing mostly highway driving.  I'd be curious to know the difference if someone does mostly city driving.

Easy enough to calculate based on NRCan's ratings. Hybrid in the city is 6.6 l/100 km, ICE  2.4 in the city 11.2 l/100 km, so ICE has incremental consumption of 4.6 l/100 km which at $1.60/liter is $74 per 1000 km. The premium for the hybrid is $4000 + hst which is  $4520 so your breakeven is ~60,000 km, roughly 4 years driving for the average driver. But very few people will do 100% pure city driving...suburban driving at 60-80 kmph is great for fuel consumption, so a more realistic position would be to take the difference between the combined NRCan rating of 7.0 l/100 km for the hybrid and 10.0 l/100 km for the ICE, which then breaks even at ~95,000 km after you include HST in the price delta.

[ktm525]

$40/1000 km is only true if you're doing mostly highway driving.  I'd be curious to know the difference if someone does mostly city driving.

Easy enough to calculate based on NRCan's ratings. Hybrid in the city is 6.6 l/100 km, ICE  2.4 in the city 11.2 l/100 km, so ICE has incremental consumption of 4.6 l/100 km which at $1.60/liter is $74 per 1000 km. The premium for the hybrid is $4000 + hst which is  $4520 so your breakeven is ~60,000 km, roughly 4 years driving for the average driver. But very few people will do 100% pure city driving...suburban driving at 60-80 kmph is great for fuel consumption, so a more realistic position would be to take the difference between the combined NRCan rating of 7.0 l/100 km for the hybrid and 10.0 l/100 km for the ICE, which then breaks even at ~95,000 km after you include HST in the price delta.

Nice analysis. What would be the repair/maintenance costs difference be between the ICE and Hybrid at 100k km? 200k km?

[me_2]

Drove a loop of 464.6km this week-end with my Volt, 108-112 avg + substantial wind.

9.6kWh (55.5km) electric portion + 11.25L (179.0km) after battery depleted, 1st sub total 234.5km
Full recharge mid-point
9.7kWh (51.0km) electric portion + 11.25L (179.1km) after battery depleted, 2nd sub total 230.1km

Avg 18.1kWh/100km (19.3kWh/106.5km)  & 6.285L/100km (22.50L/358.1km) respectively

Blended average including e-kms: 4,85L/100km  (22.5L/464.6km).

Lifetime vehicle avg now down to 1.92L/100km @ 200,000 kms (up from 1.89 Friday before this loop)

[warp]

$40/1000 km is only true if you're doing mostly highway driving.  I'd be curious to know the difference if someone does mostly city driving.

Easy enough to calculate based on NRCan's ratings. Hybrid in the city is 6.6 l/100 km, ICE  2.4 in the city 11.2 l/100 km, so ICE has incremental consumption of 4.6 l/100 km which at $1.60/liter is $74 per 1000 km. The premium for the hybrid is $4000 + hst which is  $4520 so your breakeven is ~60,000 km, roughly 4 years driving for the average driver. But very few people will do 100% pure city driving...suburban driving at 60-80 kmph is great for fuel consumption, so a more realistic position would be to take the difference between the combined NRCan rating of 7.0 l/100 km for the hybrid and 10.0 l/100 km for the ICE, which then breaks even at ~95,000 km after you include HST in the price delta.

Nice analysis. What would be the repair/maintenance costs difference be between the ICE and Hybrid at 100k km? 200k km?

Difficult to say, one can only speculate. On the one hand the hybrid has the naturally aspirated 2.5 liter 4 cylinder engine which has been used by Toyota forever so a longer history of trouble free operation versus the 2.4 liter turbo which has just been introduced in the Toyota lineup, though it has been used for the past 2-3 years in the Lexus RX/NX-350. It will also be the only engine in the upcoming Land Cruiser, part of the hybrid set-up so Toyota clearly is betting it's reputation on that engine, so it should be trouble free.....

Pads and rotors should last longer on the hybrid due to regenerative braking but in our kind of weather with exposure to snow, salt etc. the rotors are likely to get rusted and may need to be changed regardless after 4-5 years. Grinding them to clear the rust can only done so many times....

The 2.4 turbo uses 0W-20 oil which is widely available, for the hybrid Toyota now recommends a 0W-8 oil!! Don't know about cost and availability of 0W-8!!

From my previous post, if you break even at 95,000 k, you are ahead financially after that. The hybrid battery has a 10 year/240,000 km warranty, so the sweet spot to sell of your hybrid is somewhere in between I would hazard. Because, would you buy a hybrid which is at 9 year/220,000 km knowing that the battery warranty is about to run out? Or do you just run the hybrid till the battery dies, then sell it As Is...... or do you replace the hybrid battery.

Talking about replacing hybrid batteries, The Car Care Nut has a video on replacing the hybrid battery in a Toyota hybrid. Now, this is in the US and the cost was $5800. I have no idea what the equivalent cost is in Canada but I am sure it will be more than that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3VFeMWINCc

[WP v3.32]

Managed to get my average down to 10.7L/km on the Ram.  on the highway averaging 10.2l/100km.  that was with the cruise set at 119Km/h.

Now I the 2014 highlander hybrid is at about 9.0L/100km.  mostly my wife driving.  that is the last 150,000km.  she is high as when I take it im easily around 8.0... 8.5L.

[Blueprint]

A recent presser had a cumulative timer on stop-start use - as I always reset everything at pick-up, I can report that the system was active for 17 minutes for the week I had the car - that's urban driving for y'all.

[quadzilla]

Port Dover (ON) to Charlotte (NC) 1,200 km

Started off on snow covered highways until close to Buffalo, then cold and wet until heading south away from the lake. Rain and fog through WV and then temps didn't ride until over the Blue Ridge Mountains. Windy the entire drive.

6.2 L/100 with the roof box, cruise set at 115 kph (once away from the snow/ice) and multiple bursts to 130 kph not to clog up the passing lane. Many transport trucks were going 120-130 kph, same with most other cars/trucks.

The journey continues and so do the updates. These numbers is the average for the entire trip so far.

Charlotte to just past Little Rock Arkansas, now up to 6.3 L/100. Speeds have increased (75 mph limits) and so has the wind. Cruise bumped up to 120 kph. Bonus was decreasing elevation down to the Mississippi helping with F/E.

Next day to Pecos, Texas. Now up to 6.4 L/100. Landscape is much flatter but the winds are much higher. Had to drop the cruise back to 115 kph for a couple of house as the wind was crazy. Normally the transports are passing me (yes, even with cruise at 120 kph) but today I'm passing the transports, very windy.

Final push into Tucson, Arizona. More high winds plus some mountain passes to go over. F/E now up to 6.6 L/100. Started off at 120 kph but winds got very strong around noon-mid afternoon so dropped back to 115 kph again. Speed limit for a big stretch today was 80 mph but hardly anybody going that fast thanks to the strong wind. Did have a Sheriff pass me going around 110 mph!

[dkaz]

Port Dover (ON) to Charlotte (NC) 1,200 km

Started off on snow covered highways until close to Buffalo, then cold and wet until heading south away from the lake. Rain and fog through WV and then temps didn't ride until over the Blue Ridge Mountains. Windy the entire drive.

6.2 L/100 with the roof box, cruise set at 115 kph (once away from the snow/ice) and multiple bursts to 130 kph not to clog up the passing lane. Many transport trucks were going 120-130 kph, same with most other cars/trucks.

The journey continues and so do the updates. These numbers is the average for the entire trip so far.

Charlotte to just past Little Rock Arkansas, now up to 6.3 L/100. Speeds have increased (75 mph limits) and so has the wind. Cruise bumped up to 120 kph. Bonus was decreasing elevation down to the Mississippi helping with F/E.

Next day to Pecos, Texas. Now up to 6.4 L/100. Landscape is much flatter but the winds are much higher. Had to drop the cruise back to 115 kph for a couple of house as the wind was crazy. Normally the transports are passing me (yes, even with cruise at 120 kph) but today I'm passing the transports, very windy.

Final push into Tucson, Arizona. More high winds plus some mountain passes to go over. F/E now up to 6.6 L/100. Started off at 120 kph but winds got very strong around noon-mid afternoon so dropped back to 115 kph again. Speed limit for a big stretch today was 80 mph but hardly anybody going that fast thanks to the strong wind. Did have a Sheriff pass me going around 110 mph!

Looking at getting a roofbox for my 5. What sort of numbers do you typically see between the two?

[quadzilla]

Port Dover (ON) to Charlotte (NC) 1,200 km

Started off on snow covered highways until close to Buffalo, then cold and wet until heading south away from the lake. Rain and fog through WV and then temps didn't ride until over the Blue Ridge Mountains. Windy the entire drive.

6.2 L/100 with the roof box, cruise set at 115 kph (once away from the snow/ice) and multiple bursts to 130 kph not to clog up the passing lane. Many transport trucks were going 120-130 kph, same with most other cars/trucks.

The journey continues and so do the updates. These numbers is the average for the entire trip so far.

Charlotte to just past Little Rock Arkansas, now up to 6.3 L/100. Speeds have increased (75 mph limits) and so has the wind. Cruise bumped up to 120 kph. Bonus was decreasing elevation down to the Mississippi helping with F/E.

Next day to Pecos, Texas. Now up to 6.4 L/100. Landscape is much flatter but the winds are much higher. Had to drop the cruise back to 115 kph for a couple of house as the wind was crazy. Normally the transports are passing me (yes, even with cruise at 120 kph) but today I'm passing the transports, very windy.

Final push into Tucson, Arizona. More high winds plus some mountain passes to go over. F/E now up to 6.6 L/100. Started off at 120 kph but winds got very strong around noon-mid afternoon so dropped back to 115 kph again. Speed limit for a big stretch today was 80 mph but hardly anybody going that fast thanks to the strong wind. Did have a Sheriff pass me going around 110 mph!

Looking at getting a roofbox for my 5. What sort of numbers do you typically see between the two?

The box is adding 1-2 L/100 vs no box. Under normal conditions (low wind) driving at 120 kph I can get 5.5 L/100 without the box, 6.5 L/100 with the box. The more wind, the worse it gets. I've seen as high as 8 L/100 (with the box) but I was driving into brutal winds where transports were pulling off the highway.

With the box on, I max my cruise out at 120 kph but will do bursts to stay out of the passing lane. Over 120 you can easily feel the extra drag even under good conditions. I'd image your 5 would be similar.

Btw, I have a 15 cf Thule box over 15 years old.