Why isn't the fuel economy better?
 

I don't get it, I really don't. These are lightweight cars. They aren't all that powerful or fast. They don't make a lot of power or torque. Yet the fuel economy ratings are lower than some other cars that are 1000 lbs heavier and more powerful & faster.

Am I alone in thinking that these cars should be rated at least 25 city and 35 highway, at the absolute minimum? I mean, a freaking BMW 328i is a boat compared to the FT86, yet it has the same city fuel economy rating and gets 4 more mpg on the highway.

Maybe I'm being too critical, but I honestly thought that such a small and lightweight car would be more fuel efficient, especially with a 2.0 engine that makes modest power.

the rating on the car is much less than the actual #'s you get in real life. This is the only car i have ever owned that does that. In other words, i am amazed that it gets almost 40mpg .. for about the same power as the Scion TC in a lighter car ... the TC cant get 40 if it were going downhill for miles..

for a toyota sports car, im happy with 30-40... if you drive it like a grandpa u will get 40 -- if u have fun with it its still around 30 plus or minus - i find myself driving alot because of the great mpgs... + its a respectable sports car - slowly becoming one. :)

Almost 40? Wow, that's not bad at all. I didn't consider that the rating might be lower than real-life figures.

I get about 27 mpg mixed.

My Miata gets 29mpg on the same drive. It has 70hp less, and weighs about 4-500 pounds less as well. You'd think it would get 40mpg, but it doesn't.

It's about gearing, frontal surface area (wind resistance), tire selection, etc.

The automatic transmission FRS is geared for better fuel economy, though that also makes it slower.

@rikdrt1 is right, very few cars get better than rated fuel economy - hence the infamous disclaimer "your mileage may vary" ;) I get about 10mph above EPA in the Accent, but the BMWs are guzzlers. I'd guess that in the case of the twins it's due to how the tests are set up; probably they end up revving the engine more than people are actually doing in daily driving or something like that. Maybe someone who knows more about how EPA ratings are derived can chime in.

i got about 30 mixed driving in the auto, and so far, i've been getting 33.4 in the manual mixed driving.

IMO normally aspirated technology reached its pinacle when Honda released its RSX type-S in 2002. Ten years later Subaru's balance of horsepower, torque, mpg are virtually the same. How about the S2000? The extra output results in a huge decrease in fuel economy.

The answer for better fuel economy are turbos and bigger displacement/lower compression. Another forgotten factor is emissions. For argument's sake, cleaner burn engines use more fuel per say. The reason why the CR-Z's mpg isnt that great..

Although Im happy with my fuel economy(25-38mpg) and the uniqueness of the flat 4, deep inside I know it's old technology that cant be improved any further.

I live in a hilly place where my MPG's are always lower than EPA's estimates. For instance, my Prius is currently averaging 43mpg compared to 50 mpg estimated. My family owned a Scion xD that averaged 22mpg, and as of now our FR-S is averaging 23mpg which I'm quite surprised about, but happy with.

my auto FRS is averaging 25.8 mpg in my daily commute to work (5 miles one way with all city); but i've been able to get the digital mpg gauge to go 40 mpg when i steadily cruise 65mph on the freeway. it really depends on driving habits and road conditions.

Oh, good. I average about 25mpg with 60/40 highway/street split. I thought there was something horribly wrong. I guess it's just the hills here. :thanks:

I have this pic in another thread buuuuut....
Attachment 18739
it was at 42.9 when i was pulling out my phone and changed down .1 during idle lol
but really, i'm getting 34 mpg and im not a conservative driver so idk what the fuss is about

I've been averaging 27-29 and that's cruising speeds of 60 - 70, stop and go traffic every morning and not being gentle on the throttle. I'm pretty happy with that.

Yeah buddy find another car, or do just a little fucking research, its a fuckin rwd drift oriented car, i get 32.8 driving like a mad man......

How are you getting that kind of mileage on yours? My avg after 1400 miles so far is 30.8mpg MT, commuting to work 70/30 fwy/street going around 70mph.

As hard as it may be, drive a tank at 60 mph and dont go over 3k rpm. You will be amazed what a light foot can achieve.

im getting around 24.5mpg, all street with plenty of stops driving like a grandpa

Honestly i never go by the estimated gas, or the dash. To get realworld numbers you have to fill up drive all the way to about 1/4 tank or E and then refill again and calculate how many miles/numbers of gallons filled. My GF has a 2012 328xi and she averages 22-24mpg(mixed) FR-S tells you went to shift and if you follow it you'll average about 27-30mpg (mixed). highest ive hit is 38-39mpg driving like a grandma and lowest was 25mpg and that was me driving like i was in fast in the furious..i'm very impressed with the fuel consumption in this car in a positive way. Someone mentioned the tc couldnt even get that and i owned a tc before this car and they were right! 19mpg-24mpg.

You can't compare cars like the BMW that cost twice as much. That's like saying "Look, Subaru's 3.6L flat six only makes 256hp and Porsche's 3.6L makes 400hp." Why isn't it better? Because you're getting the car for $25k. It's a 2.0L, high-strung boxer engine producing 100hp per liter, and it's inexpensive. Boxers aren't known for being princely on fuel, either. I'd say we're lucky to get up to 30mpg.

yea, Im getting about 33 to 36 MPG on highway trips. I never expected that type of milege. This is a great freakin car and I dont care about the MPG but its nice to know that it gets great MPG for the type of car it is.

Everyone here that is complaining is forgetting about the ridiculous emissions and safety requirements oems have to meet.

You want great mpg? It's easy, remove the cats and lean out the fuel maps. Probably get 35mpg easy with +20hp.

It really depends on how you drive the car...stay off throttle as much as possible and keep the rpms low and you will get better fuel mileage. Personally I can't do that, once the car is warmed up 5k-7k rpm is my shifting range much of the time...average about 22-24 mpg daily, sometimes 20 mpg. I did recently get 33 mpg (calculated at fuel stops) fairly consistently during an ~3,500 mile round trip on vacation - which is not bad considering my FR-S has maximum performance sticky tires (in stock size, aired to 45 psi for the trip), uses 10-W30 weight oil, and had 200+lbs of cargo with me. Also seemed easier to get 33 mpg in the mountains than on flat interstate, though in the flatter interstate regions it was getting the 33 mpg at 80 mph (cruise set at 3.5k rpm) versus about 70 mph up in the mountains.

I've been getting just under 30mpg's. And I don't try to get good gas mileage either.

I personally think the gas mileage on the highway is superb, and that is where everyone is getting great numbers from. From what I've read, the lower numbers are generally coming from people doing more city driving then highway driving.

Gearing makes a difference in fuel mileage too. Look at the difference between the manual and auto FT-86. What is the gearing of those cars you mentioned. How many gears. How many gears are overdrive?

The twins are geared lower to raise the fun factor at the cost of a little fuel mileage. Most small displacement sports cars are the same. The Miata, S2000 and MR-S were not fuel mileage champs either despite their small engines and light weight.

According to my trip computer I have averaged 8.7 l/100km over approximately 8200 km.

In American English, I have averaged 32.7 mi/gal based on the imperial gallon.

In real American English, I have averaged 26.9 mi/gallon over a total distance of roughly 5100 miles. I completely disregarded the break in procedure WRT to max rpm's but didnt sustain throttle up high..

Mostly highway commute to and from work but have also had lots of fun, get the drift? Gone out with my 3rd seat occupied by my 5 yr old many times too (not deliberately sliding).

wouldnt toyota have a problem with the epa's mpg ratings if that were the case?

the aftermarket exhaust helps as it helps the engine run more effeciently and since its louder, i can hear and control the throttle to not use extra gas unecessarily if i dont want to

Simple -
When I drive like a fool, I'm getting 23 - 24mpg.
When I drive like a gentleman, I'm getting 30 - 32mpg

Forget the price of the car. The reason I chose to compare the 328i is because it has a 2.0L 4-cylinder engine, although it's also turbocharged. I'm just surprised that the BMW has an engine with the same displacement, pushing a much heavier car, and still has a significantly higher highway fuel economy rating. But like others have said, real-world mileage can vary. Maybe the ratings are misleading.

On my previous Honda, I got MPG way better than the car was rated. I calculated my expected mpg for the MT FR-S using the same ration. I anticipated an average rating of 29mpg average and 34.5 highway. Turns out that is exactly what I am getting.

The US EPA uses a system for calculating mpg that seems to underrate MT cars and overrates Automatics. But I think it is very tough to come up with a algorithm that would be 90+% accurate.

The best way to determine the MPG of a car, is to determine the ratio between the EPA mpg that your last car received and your actual real-world mpg. Now apply that ratio to the EPA estimates of the car you are considering.

hit the treadmill and you can easily get your mpg up!

I'm more gentlemanly than you because I'm getting 34-37mpg when driving sane :D

my friend in his FR-S gets 24mpg while I get 27mpg in my BRZ

On a previously reported observation, I shared that for a 107.9 km journey from the edge of the city, through the foot hills to the edge of the mountains, pretty hilly, 100-110kph. I calculated based on a top up, 5.0 litres/100km. 46.9 miles/USG! Premium 91AKI V-Power.

Now where I am doing like 90-100% city I can observe between 26-30 miles/usg . It only takes a few heavy footed accelerations to move the single tank average quite a bit.

I agree it really depends on how you are driving!

I always drive like a douche, but I'm still averaging 28ish. It's a godsend, my 1.8 liter miata was giving me low 20's...

how would the removing the cat converter increase fuel efficiency?

i'm not pro at this but doesnt it block airflow in the exhaust to an extent? w/ no cat, the engine flows more free.

Ride the brakes going down hills in the Prius and let the regen do its thing ;)

I get about 25mpg in my 6AT, but a) all of my driving is city/surburban that rarely gets me above 55 for anything more than a minute or two and b) I drive like a hooligan.

I'd say that's pretty good, considering. If you drive like everyone else and treat the gas pedal like a pressure-sensitive landmine, you'll get great gas efficiency.

Car makers are very EPA-conscious these days. This is in part due to fear of CAFE and in part due to recent consumer demand where 40 has become the magic number, as in 40mpg hwy. Therefore, BMW and others deliberately target these ratings, going to great lengths to fully analyze and exploit the details of how EPA numbers are reached. By contrast, EPA ratings clearly were not a priority - probably not even a consideration at all - in the design of the twins, and the 30+ mpg that some people are getting is just a happy perk.

Seriously?

CAFE is an average for all the cars a manufacturer sells. It's very important to all manufacturers to keep their average fuel economy up to meet CAFE regulations. Trust me, Toyota & Subaru didn't ignore fuel economy on these cars!