Well, the Scangauge I bought is working great, and I thought I'd share the
new tank of gas mileage with the group.

In -pure- city driving, and we're talking not any free speed length of more
than a quarter mile, ninety percent on stop and go with lights and
stopsigns every two or three blocks. But decent slow driving.

At this point with close to half a tank used, 22.5 mpg. And still very
slowly dropping.

Frowny face.

Normally it's a mixture of freeway and town, which puts it around 26 to 27,
but this stint of stop and go really takes it's toll. The good part is
that I know it will get around 40 on the road, which makes it a little
better.

But still impressively low I think.

 

unkadunk wrote:
> Well, the Scangauge I bought is working great, and I thought I'd share the
> new tank of gas mileage with the group.
>
> In -pure- city driving, and we're talking not any free speed length of more
> than a quarter mile, ninety percent on stop and go with lights and
> stopsigns every two or three blocks. But decent slow driving.
>
> At this point with close to half a tank used, 22.5 mpg. And still very
> slowly dropping.

With that little gas used, trip computers are not very accurate. It
could easily be off by several mpg in either direction.

> Frowny face.

Shutting off your engine at lights will help significantly.

> Normally it's a mixture of freeway and town, which puts it around 26 to 27,
> but this stint of stop and go really takes it's toll. The good part is
> that I know it will get around 40 on the road, which makes it a little
> better.

40? Not likely. Something in the range of 36, perhaps 37 is more like
it, provided that you drive reasonably.

> But still impressively low I think.

What's impressive about low mileage?

 

Brian Nystrom <brian.nystrom@verizon.net> wrote in
news:LKSGi.485$fz2.458@trndny03:
.........
> With that little gas used, trip computers are not very accurate. It
> could easily be off by several mpg in either direction.
...........

>> Normally it's a mixture of freeway and town, which puts it around 26
>> to 27, but this stint of stop and go really takes it's toll. The
>> good part is that I know it will get around 40 on the road, which
>> makes it a little better.
>
> 40? Not likely. Something in the range of 36, perhaps 37 is more like
> it, provided that you drive reasonably.


Well, the one true trip I took that needed a fill-up off the interstate was
right at 40 mpg. And the Scangauge in instant mileage mode hovers right at
that rate on level ground (plenty where I live) at 65 - 70. Any faster and
it heads down into high 30 figures you note. So it seems to be fairly
accurate so far, albeit based on that one trip.


>
>> But still impressively low I think.
>
> What's impressive about low mileage?


I admit my verbiage incompetence. -Depressingly- low enough to make me
look at the Prius web pages in envy. And halfway seriousness. Double city
mileage is serious stuff (to me). Long term payoff or not.

 

unkadunk wrote:

> Well, the one true trip I took that needed a fill-up off the interstate was
> right at 40 mpg. And the Scangauge in instant mileage mode hovers right at
> that rate on level ground (plenty where I live) at 65 - 70. Any faster and
> it heads down into high 30 figures you note. So it seems to be fairly
> accurate so far, albeit based on that one trip.

If you're not filling up at the same pump or at least averaging the
mileage over several fill-ups, you may get abnormal readings, since the
shut-off setting on pumps varies considerably. Additionally, if a trip
is one way, it can be affected by wind and terrain. 40 mpg is beyond
what the Elantra is capable of averaging at normal highway speeds,
though people who drive long distances at ~50 mph have seen that kind of
mileage.

 

I've started to keep track of my milage simply calculating it based on the
amount of gas and distance travelled since the last fill up.

I'm driving a 2002 2.0l Elantra.

I do mostly highway driving around 100-120km/h which is about 60-70mph and
get 39MPG or 8.6 l/100km for those north of the boarder like me ;-)

Those figures are based on 6 fillups mostly from about 1/4 - 1/2 empty
having travelled 2218km.

The only thing i've really gained from this is that i drive a heck of a
lot more than i thought. However, i am getting about what i expected from
the data i've seen on my vehicle.


--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/alt.autos.hyundai/
More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html

 

On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 20:26:33 -0400, jmh_ottawa posted:

>I've started to keep track of my milage simply calculating it based on the
>amount of gas and distance travelled since the last fill up.
>
>I'm driving a 2002 2.0l Elantra.
>
>I do mostly highway driving around 100-120km/h which is about 60-70mph and
>get 39MPG or 8.6 l/100km for those north of the boarder like me ;-)

My math skills ain't what they used to be, but I don't think 39 MPG
equates to 8.6 l/100km.

>Those figures are based on 6 fillups mostly from about 1/4 - 1/2 empty
>having travelled 2218km.
>
>The only thing i've really gained from this is that i drive a heck of a
>lot more than i thought. However, i am getting about what i expected from
>the data i've seen on my vehicle.

 

LoL If it isn't then the online calc i'm using doesn't work haha

--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/alt.autos.hyundai/
More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html

 

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 07:32:36 -0400, jmh_ottawa posted:

>LoL If it isn't then the online calc i'm using doesn't work haha

Try the one at http://www.euronet.nl/users/grantm/frans/fuel.html

If you want to do it yourself, here are some conversions for various
parts of the process. I found these at

http://en.18dao.net/Measure_Conversion/fuelconsumption

------------------
To change into

miles per gallon (UK) miles per gallon (US) multiply by 0.833
miles per gallon (UK) miles per litre multiply by 0.22
miles per litre miles per gallon (UK) multiply by 4.546
miles per gallon (UK) kilometres per litre multiply by 0.354

miles per gallon (US) miles per gallon (UK) multiply by 1.2
miles per gallon (US) miles per litre multiply by 0.2642
miles per litre miles per gallon (US) multiply by 3.785
miles per gallon (US) kilometres per litre multiply by 0.4251

X miles per gallon gallons per 100 miles: divide 100 by X
(both gallons must of the same type)

X miles per gallon (UK) litres per 100 km: divide 282.5 by X
X miles per gallon (US) litres per 100 km: divide 235.2 by X
X km per litre litres per 100 km: divide 100 by X
X miles per litre litres per 100 km: divide 62.14 by X

-----------------

I wrote up a little sheet using these conversions. I'd email it,
but it's so simple, I'll just write it this way:

Cell Contents
---- --------------------------------
A1 MPG -> litres/100km
C1 litres/100km (US Gal)
E1 litres/100km (Imp Gal)

A2
C2 =IF(A2;100/(A2*0.4251);0)
E2 =IF(A2;100/(A2*0.354);0)

A4 Litres/100km -> MPG
C4 MPG (US)
E4 MPG (UK)

A5
C5 =IF(A5;100/A5*0.6213712*3.785;0)
E5 =IF(A5;100/A5*0.6213712*4.546;0)
-----------------------------------------

A1, C1, D1, A4, C4, E4 are all strings

Enter MPG in A2

Enter litres/100km into A5

 

Yep looks like the online calc i was using sucked..

Over 3384km of driving during the past month i'm getting 28.5 us mpg and
8.32 l/100km not as low as it could be but driving at 100-120km/h doesn't
help i'm sure.

--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/alt.autos.hyundai/
More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html

 

jmh_ottawa wrote:
> Yep looks like the online calc i was using sucked..
>
> Over 3384km of driving during the past month i'm getting 28.5 us mpg and
> 8.32 l/100km not as low as it could be but driving at 100-120km/h doesn't
> help i'm sure.
>
> --
> Message posted using http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/alt.autos.hyundai/
> More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html

At speeds in the 100-110 KPH range on the highway, you should be able to
get over 35 mpg, if your car has a manual transmission.