Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Wednesday July 30, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > Warranty Issues & SOA Problems

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-10-2012, 11:20 AM   #176
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm
flyboy 1100 and zeeper,

I don't know why you guys just don't get it. First off, fuelly.com does not differentiate between the cvt and the 5 sp, so again it is not valid to compare the 27/36 cvt with the 25/33 5 sp, so continuing to quote it is shows a blatant disregard for reallity.

Next, you have been shown more than once that when compared to the consumer reports independent mileage statistics of the other imports that actually get the 27 overall the Impreza gets, the EPA numbers are inflated by the Impreza is woefully low, even compared to the Kia - in fact the Impreza is over rated by the EPA numbers compared to the other imports that got the same actual mpg by about 20%. Those are what are called "statistics".

So what is this about a "Subaru mileage statement"?

Bluto123 I feel your pain and I too would give the car back if I could get my money back.
Boo hoo, cry me a river

Did you ever even research subaru historic mpg? It's an awd vehicle, did you expect miracles to have been made by using a cvt and a smaller engine (on a relatively heavy small car?)I did, and I didn't expect to see over 30 average, I was ok with that for getting awd, otherwise I would have bought a Mazda 3
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

Last edited by flyboy1100; 11-10-2012 at 11:28 AM.
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 12:12 PM   #177
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy1100 View Post
Boo hoo, cry me a river
Thanks for that reasoned, logical, and mature comeback flyboy.

You don't seem to get that the EPA ratings take all the awd etc. considerations into account. So, yes, I expect a newly designed engine, "futuristic cvt" (which still does shift, albeit smoothly) and low profile to get closer to 10 mpg less than a smilar vehicle that is rated the same.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 12:41 PM   #178
Zeeper
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Albany NY
Vehicle:
2012 Sport 5MT
Green/Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
flyboy 1100 and zeeper,

fuelly.com does not differentiate between the cvt and the 5 sp, so again it is not valid to compare the 27/36 cvt with the 25/33 5 sp, so continuing to quote it is shows a blatant disregard for reallity.

Not that I ever get your point, but you make it sound like grouping 5 speeds that get lower mileage with with the CVT's that get better mileage is creating an artificially higher Combined MPG number on Fuelly.

It's the opposite. If they separated the two, the CVT Combined Fuel Economy would be higher, not lower, than the current combined number on Fuelly.

That the average driver (197 drivers tracking their mileage over 1.2 million miles) is getting within 1-2 mpg of the EPA Combined Fuel Economy is a fact, you can look at that same data that I look at.

You can argue that YOU don't get what the EPA tells you the car can return, but you cannot argue that the average driver isn't getting EPA specified mileage.

Unless you have more valid data than Fuelly. So show us the numbers...
Zeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 12:58 PM   #179
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post

So, yes, I expect a newly designed engine, "futuristic cvt" (which still does shift, albeit smoothly) and low profile to get closer to 10 mpg less than a smilar vehicle that is rated the same.


similar vehicle being your old toyota crapola, which weighs 800lbs less? yes i fully expect those 2 cars to have the same real world mileage

http://www.fuelly.com/car/subaru/impreza/2012
looks to be dead in the middle between 5sp and cvt COMBINED economy

http://www.fuelly.com/car/toyota/corolla/2003
combined is only 1.7 over the impreza

and just for kicks
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find....31721&id=18604

yup, sure does look like the corolla beats the crap out of the impreza in the mpg department.
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 12:59 PM   #180
Bluto123
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 337502
Join Date: Nov 2012
Default

"i realize you have the CVT and this is for the 5sp so the numbers are off a little, but i am pretty sure you fall into the "expected range for most drivers...." range"

I understand EPA estimates, and I appreciate that mileage varies based on how/where/when the car is driven. This is why I carefully identified how I drive, where and when I drive.

I also identified a problem with the tranny that is partially the cause of the poor mileage. I don't recall asking for an engine breaking system. I guess I should be happy that my car doesn't make that 'jake-brake' sound as it descends hills? It would be unbearable if I had to live with engine breaking an another noise.

Every other car I have owned has delivered over the estimated mileage BECAUSE OF where/when/how I drive. I was getting at least 33mpg AVERAGE from my Versa (that is ESTIMATED to get 33 HWY), and now get AVERAGE 28 from a car that is ESTIMATED to get 36 HWY.

Hyundai just got busted for fudging their numbers... maybe Subi is next. Or maybe some of the production run got back programming for the tranny. Whatever it is, it is real, and it is a disappointment.
Bluto123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 01:03 PM   #181
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeeper View Post
That the average driver (197 drivers tracking their mileage over 1.2 million miles) is getting within 1-2 mpg of the EPA Combined Fuel Economy is a fact, you can look at that same data that I look at.

You can argue that YOU don't get what the EPA tells you the car can return, but you cannot argue that the average driver isn't getting EPA specified mileage.

Unless you have more valid data than Fuelly. So show us the numbers...
What makes you think the fuelly numbers are "combined" and not mostly highway? Consumer Reports gives independent, standardized comparison figures. Most vehicles have better actual "combined" Epa figures, but the Impreza is significantly lower. There are your numbers:

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/c...s-overview.htm
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 01:49 PM   #182
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm

What makes you think the fuelly numbers are "combined" and not mostly highway? Consumer Reports gives independent, standardized comparison figures. Most vehicles have better actual "combined" Epa figures, but the Impreza is significantly lower. There are your numbers:

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/c...s-overview.htm
Because there are nearly 200 vehicles, if you look through, no one is reporting 100% highway.

I noticed you are ignoring my post with information contradicting what you say. It is because I have found too much evidence otherwise?
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 03:07 PM   #183
Zeeper
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Albany NY
Vehicle:
2012 Sport 5MT
Green/Silver

Default

Haters gotta hate.

Haters who drive 70+ and complain they aren't getting the EPA numbers or better are just stupid, because the EPA tells you how they perform their testing, and it does not include high speed driving.

Haters who drive short distances starting with a cold engine are gonna get terrible mileage with this car. The EPA city miles test with a warmed up engine. They should have bought a Prius.

Those who hate getting stuck in the snow or sliding all over the place in the snow don't own an Impreza. Nuff said.
Zeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 03:29 PM   #184
Knotsure
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 41730
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Jersey
Vehicle:
0910 Leggy3.0/Impr
BLU Leg/BLK Imp

Default

Fwiw - my in-laws are on a fixed income so fuel economy is very important to them. They don't drive particularly slow/granny style and? For the most part, they are 'combined' in their routes/travels. They track their mileage by writing down their miles driven-for the month-and gallons added -for the month. After tracking this way for almost 8 months, they are averaging 38 mpg. They are very happy with this. Not commenting on the arguments here. Just adding my $.02 based on their mileage notebook.
Knotsure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 03:51 PM   #185
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Knotsure
Fwiw - my in-laws are on a fixed income so fuel economy is very important to them. They don't drive particularly slow/granny style and? For the most part, they are 'combined' in their routes/travels. They track their mileage by writing down their miles driven-for the month-and gallons added -for the month. After tracking this way for almost 8 months, they are averaging 38 mpg. They are very happy with this. Not commenting on the arguments here. Just adding my $.02 based on their mileage notebook.
Are they adjusting for odometer error?
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 03:52 PM   #186
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeeper
Haters gotta hate.

Haters who drive 70+ and complain they aren't getting the EPA numbers or better are just stupid, because the EPA tells you how they perform their testing, and it does not include high speed driving.

Haters who drive short distances starting with a cold engine are gonna get terrible mileage with this car. The EPA city miles test with a warmed up engine. They should have bought a Prius.

Those who hate getting stuck in the snow or sliding all over the place in the snow don't own an Impreza. Nuff said.
Exactly. My mpg is pretty good until above 75, then it drops really fast. My current tank will probably be like 25mpg but it is all 80-85 with 20-30mph headwinds
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 04:41 PM   #187
Knotsure
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 41730
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Jersey
Vehicle:
0910 Leggy3.0/Impr
BLU Leg/BLK Imp

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy1100

Are they adjusting for odometer error?
I'm not sure (well, actually I'm Knotsure) what you mean, but what's to adjust?

Can you explain your question for dense peeps like me?
Knotsure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 05:10 PM   #188
Zeeper
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Albany NY
Vehicle:
2012 Sport 5MT
Green/Silver

Default

They are calculating MPG by dividing Miles by Gallons added. This usually returns a lower number than the dash gauge displays.
Zeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 06:00 PM   #189
Knotsure
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 41730
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Jersey
Vehicle:
0910 Leggy3.0/Impr
BLU Leg/BLK Imp

Default

I don't think they are using the dash gauge display at all. I didn't get into the why/what for with them about that. They have these little notebooks that they've always used for their cars. They showed me what they've got for the Impreza because they are pretty pleased with things. That's when they broke out all of their other books they've saved over the years. Including their Baja that was getting 23mpgs
Knotsure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 06:38 PM   #190
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy1100 View Post
Because there are nearly 200 vehicles, if you look through, no one is reporting 100% highway.

I noticed you are ignoring my post with information contradicting what you say. It is because I have found too much evidence otherwise?
However, most are reporting above combined, while the Impreza definitely is not.

As far as your "evidence" I'm not sure what you're talking about. You obviously lost your train of thought or something, because my 2004 Corolla is rated at 36 highway (2008 norming, which would make it the 5 sp), the same as the Impreza cvt. I get 40 mpg at 75 mph in it. I can't even get 40 mpg at 60 mph in my cvt Impreza on a good day.

You seem to keep forgetting Consumer Reports, in which the Impreza mpg is inflated by 20%.

I guess reality means nothing to you...
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 07:59 PM   #191
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm

However, most are reporting above combined, while the Impreza definitely is not.

As far as your "evidence" I'm not sure what you're talking about. You obviously lost your train of thought or something, because my 2004 Corolla is rated at 36 highway (2008 norming, which would make it the 5 sp), the same as the Impreza cvt. I get 40 mpg at 75 mph in it. I can't even get 40 mpg at 60 mph in my cvt Impreza on a good day.

You seem to keep forgetting Consumer Reports, in which the Impreza mpg is inflated by 20%.

I guess reality means nothing to you...
No because I get 31.5mpg at 75mph, 5% off the highway (and I don't drive remotely similar to the test procedure)

My point was the fuelly numbers don't lie, neither do the fueleconomy.gov numbers, both cars achieve similar mpg over a wide range of vehicles, unlike your physics defying corolla which is way above what most people are seeing
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 08:56 PM   #192
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy1100 View Post
No because I get 31.5mpg at 75mph, 5% off the highway (and I don't drive remotely similar to the test procedure)

My point was the fuelly numbers don't lie, neither do the fueleconomy.gov numbers, both cars achieve similar mpg over a wide range of vehicles, unlike your physics defying corolla which is way above what most people are seeing
I guess you think Consumer Reports lies too then, because their independent tests don't agree with Subaru's tests.

Actually I think I have noticed a trend here. The 5 sp people support Subaru's "EPA" tests, while the cvt people don't, for the most part.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 10:51 PM   #193
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm

I guess you think Consumer Reports lies too then, because their independent tests don't agree with Subaru's tests.

Actually I think I have noticed a trend here. The 5 sp people support Subaru's "EPA" tests, while the cvt people don't, for the most part.
Because the 5sp is pretty accurate
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 11:45 PM   #194
G-Omaha
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 209172
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Omaha, NE
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza CLL
BL2

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Knotsure View Post
Fwiw - my in-laws are on a fixed income so fuel economy is very important to them. They don't drive particularly slow/granny style and? For the most part, they are 'combined' in their routes/travels. They track their mileage by writing down their miles driven-for the month-and gallons added -for the month. After tracking this way for almost 8 months, they are averaging 38 mpg. They are very happy with this. Not commenting on the arguments here. Just adding my $.02 based on their mileage notebook.
My Father-in-law is 91. He drives a 15 year old Ford 1/4 Ton Pickup. When he starts, it's pedal to the medal and when he comes to speed, he brakes. He's has been, for some reason, complaining about the bad gas mileage on all of his cars - including the VW Bug that burned.

Wonder why????
G-Omaha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 08:02 AM   #195
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy1100 View Post
Because the 5sp is pretty accurate
So apparently in terms of personal experiences here it's a cvt problem?
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 08:34 AM   #196
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm

So apparently in terms of personal experiences here it's a cvt problem?
Pretty much everyone bitching about fuel economy drives a cvt.

Have you done zeepers suggestion? Take your car out to the highway, set the cruise at 65, reset 1 trip computer, and see what it reports for average fuel economy after 10 miles. The repeat for 70,75, etc

You can also try the manual mode and see what your mpg is in 5th vs 6th. The low rpm of 6th might use as higher throttle percentage because you are out of the power band.

I think you should do those things and report back because I'm curious of your findings, especially the "gear"one

Last edited by flyboy1100; 11-11-2012 at 08:59 AM.
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 08:58 AM   #197
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Okay, so I decided to check my numbers. Being an engineer, I'm not so impressed with weasel words like "your mileage may vary" and like to rely on facts.

I found out I was wrong. I had used the Impreza sedan CR figure of 27 mpg, and I have the hatchback. The hatchback is rated by Consumer Reports at 26 mpg.

Good news and bad news on that. The good news: I had a whole new set of reference vehicles. The bad news: the results would likely not be accurate since 3 of the 5 other cars were made by either Hyundai or Kia (same mfgr, caught cheating in this very subject).

Drum Roll please.

Overall, the Impreza's numbers reported to the EPA were between 15 and 20 percent higher (inflated, exaggerated, biased, whatever you want to call it) than the reported numbers from the others (including mostly the cheaters). Taking out the cheaters, the difference increased to from 28 to 35%.

Conclusion #1: Yes, Kia/Hyundai inflated their numbers.
Conclusion #2: Subaru inflated their numbers about twice as much.

The raw data:

Impreza cvt 27/36, Hyundai Elantra 23/30, Kia Forte 26/36, Mazda 3 2.3 turbo 18/25, Kia Soul 26/34, and Beetle 22/31.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 09:13 AM   #198
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy1100 View Post
Have you done zeepers suggestion? Take your car out to the highway, set the cruise at 65, test 1 trip computer, and see what it reports for average fuel economy after 10 miles. The repeat for 70,75, etc

You can also try the manual mode and see what your mpg is in 5th vs 6th. The low rpm of 6th might use as higher throttle percentage because you are out of the power band.

I think you should do those things and report back because I'm curious of your findings, especially the "gear"one
I have a Scangauge. It meters the OBDII system and instantly reports the mpg and a whole bunch of other stuff. It will report instantaneous, current, day, previous day, and tank (simultaneously). In the "current" mode you can reset it at any time.

Bottom line is the installed gauge on top came from the dealer inflated by 5%. Not only that, but when it is reset it takes a while to report, and the initial report is generally inflated because there is some error in the algorithm that inflates it further, so when it's reset it usually comes out with an even more inflated number which slowly drops back to a constant offset after a few hundred miles.

Which is one reason I discount Zeeper's comments.

I will try the manual mode though. It will give me a chance to check the temperature effect though, since it's only in the 20's right now and the last time I did it the temperature was right at 50.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 07:33 PM   #199
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Okay, I checked Auto vs. 5th and 6th.

In 6th,
At 60 and 70, there was virtually no difference between Auto and 6th (6th was 1 - 2% better).
At 80, Auto was 5% better than 6th.

In 5th, Auto was about 10% better than 5th across the board.

These were two way runs on a flat and level road, no traffic, cruise control. Absolute best case.

36 mpg at 60,
31 mpg at 70,
26 mpg at 80.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 09:20 PM   #200
aeoporta
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 334126
Join Date: Oct 2012
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: New York
Vehicle:
2013 5mt Sp Premium
Venetian Red & Dark Gray

Default

For everyone complaint about downshifts going down hill honda autos always do this and also when you hit the brakes. They also hold gear going up hills as well
aeoporta is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2012 WRX: driving techniques for fuel economy? exk20z3kid Newbies & FAQs 32 08-30-2012 11:47 AM
2009 Impreza Fuel Economy Jon [in CT] News & Rumors 54 08-22-2008 09:19 PM
Fuel Economy Issues Nitrous Newbies & FAQs 25 12-13-2007 08:56 PM
2008 Impreza & WRX EPA Fuel Economy WraithAkaMrak News & Rumors 12 07-25-2007 01:38 AM
I think my fuel guage is messed up...or fuel economy GooseMan Service & Maintenance 6 05-02-2003 03:52 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.