Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Wednesday July 23, 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 Subaru Models > Impreza Forum

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 07-22-2013, 10:42 AM   #4526
Xafen
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 306398
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Omaha, NE
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Premium
Camellia Red

Default

Yes, any priced non-ethanol, including premium, is, for me at least, still worth it. Premium here is ~9-12% more than 89 (10% ethanol) octane. I get 12-16% better mpg. Our cars don't need premium though, so 87 octane (0 ethanol) at 2-4% more than 89 octane (10% ethanol) is what I go with.

YMMV, especially in non-midwest states where ethanol price scaws (sp?) things.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Xafen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 11:45 AM   #4527
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xafen View Post
Yes, any priced non-ethanol, including premium, is, for me at least, still worth it. Premium here is ~9-12% more than 89 (10% ethanol) octane. I get 12-16% better mpg. Our cars don't need premium though, so 87 octane (0 ethanol) at 2-4% more than 89 octane (10% ethanol) is what I go with.

YMMV, especially in non-midwest states where ethanol price scaws (sp?) things.
ND used to allow non ethanol in 87, but they past a law this spring about the requirement, makes sense from the number 2 oil producing state.....

According to pure gas there are still a few stations, sounds like a good excuse for a motorcycle ride to me!
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 01:33 PM   #4528
lymphomaniac
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 334451
Join Date: Oct 2012
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: YVR
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza2.0i CVT
DGM (sedan)

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy1100 View Post
Just filled up, 404 miles, 12.8 gal, 31.6 mpg (car indicated 31.5). 25% city, heavy a/c useage. Well 87 non ethanol you will be missed!

In the name of science I filled up with 91 non ethanol, and will for the next 3 total tanks to see if it is worth the 15% cost premium, it wasn't over 87 non, but it might be over 87 w/ ethanol
I've been running 91 (eth content unknown but definitely much less than the 87 octane swill - it even smells different) since about tank #20 - and I'm at tank 41ish, 42ish at the moment. The car pulls better and gives me better fuel consumption figures.

Even though it costs about 8-10% more than the crappy 87 octane (10% eth), I'm getting easily 15-20% less fuel consumption (from 1.5 to 2.0 litres less per 100 km; I was averaging 9.5 to 10 litres per 100 km while I was on 87 and 89 octane). My commute also involves quite a few elevation changes, so having that extra kick from the unadulterated (or less adulterated) gasoline for handling the steeper inclines is definitely useful.

For me, the added cost is well worth it.
lymphomaniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 05:00 PM   #4529
Caocao
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 330507
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Ottawa
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Ltd CVT
White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ocellaris View Post
I wouldn't say that at all. I've had 5 new cars I've tracked MPG on, the Impreza was by far the furthest off the EPA rating. I beat the EPA HWY number *once* in 22K miles of 90% highway driving, cruise control set around 65MPH - 70 MPG (Premium trim sedan). In other cars I can get EPA easily with reasonable driving. I drive the same roads at the same speed every day for ~10 years.

Also all of my data was hand checked and didn't rely on the dash computer which is very optimistic in my experience.

My Impreza was 36 MPG HWY, I switched to a Legacy rated 32 MPG HWY. With the Legacy I am only doing 1MPG (combined) worse in a much larger car, bigger engine, more comfortable, better handling/steering, and it can go up hills without breaking 4K RPMs. In Winter months, the Legacy actually gets slighter better MPG than the Impreza as well.
Ok so 36 mpg is right on the money for the hwy numbers so i'm not sure what your point is? Or are you talking about a different car?
Caocao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 07:41 PM   #4530
hemophilic
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 301213
Join Date: Nov 2011
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Raleigh, NC
Vehicle:
2012 Imp. Sp. Ltd.
Blue/Silver

Default

I think he's saying the imp is RATED 36, the legacy 32, and the real world difference is 1 mpg.
hemophilic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 10:37 PM   #4531
G2Spfld
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 354284
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:
2013 Imp Sport CVT
SWP

Default

From reading various people on here, it seems the new cars are not exceeding EPA mpg ratings like the earlier models were capable of. When the newest car is the Subaru, it seems like its the only one not exceeding it. However looking at ratings of other cars in the 2013 model year they also have reduced milage. I'm assuming this is mostly due to more restrictions in emissions. Each manufacturer deals with this in different ways, more focus on exhaust and converters, less cubic inch engines, a combo of each. Point is while striving to reach the new standards they didn't have in years past, they have hit and missed the mark.
G2Spfld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 10:38 PM   #4532
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 Caocao View Post
Ok so 36 mpg is right on the money for the hwy numbers so i'm not sure what your point is? Or are you talking about a different car?
No, he said

"I've had 5 new cars I've tracked MPG on, the Impreza was by far the furthest off the EPA rating. I beat the EPA HWY number *once* in 22K miles of 90% highway driving, cruise control set around 65MPH - 70 MPG (Premium trim sedan). In other cars I can get EPA easily with reasonable driving. I drive the same roads at the same speed every day for ~10 years."


"Furthest off" is not "right on the money".

Pretty much the same result as mine - basically the Impreza doesn't measure up compared to others, and that's what the EPA sticker says - for "comparison".
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 10:43 PM   #4533
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 G2Spfld View Post
From reading various people on here, it seems the new cars are not exceeding EPA mpg ratings like the earlier models were capable of. When the newest car is the Subaru, it seems like its the only one not exceeding it. However looking at ratings of other cars in the 2013 model year they also have reduced milage. I'm assuming this is mostly due to more restrictions in emissions. Each manufacturer deals with this in different ways, more focus on exhaust and converters, less cubic inch engines, a combo of each. Point is while striving to reach the new standards they didn't have in years past, they have hit and missed the mark.
Not true at all. These cars all got 35 mpg highway in current Consumer Reports' testing, which is real world testing. The listed number is the EPA highway mpg. This shows the Impreza does not measure up to its EPA test results.


Subaru Impreza sedan Premium 4-cyl CVT___ 36
Acura TL Base V6 ______________________29
Acura TSX 4-cyl ________________________30
Audi A4 sedan Premium 4-cyl______________29
Ford Mustang coupe Premium V6 MT________29
Dodge Avenger Mainstreet 4-cyl___________31
Lexus ES 350 V6_______________________31
Mazda MX-5 Miata Grand Touring 4-cyl MT___28
Nissan Altima 3.5 SL V6 CVT______________31
Subaru Legacy 2.5i Premium 4-cyl CVT______32
Volkswagen CC Sport 4-cyl_______________31
Volvo C30 T5 1.0 5-cyl MT ________________28
Volvo S60 T5 5-cyl______________________30

For more specific information on that, look here:
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2477627
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 10:50 PM   #4534
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Blah blah blah
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 11:07 PM   #4535
G2Spfld
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 354284
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:
2013 Imp Sport CVT
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy1100 View Post
Blah blah blah
X2- interesting- the 2.5 legacy gets 35 real world with the CVT, but rated 32, but the 2.0 impreza rated at 36 gets 35 "real world" same as the 2.5 legacy? In thinking issue isn't CVT, the issue is the 2.0, and its lack of power.
G2Spfld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 11:38 PM   #4536
Commander Keen
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 319157
Join Date: May 2012
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza 4DR 5MT

Default

148 HP moves the car nicely, though the final drive is a bit short for my liking.

I'd prefer a 60 MPH cruise at 1900 RPM rather than 2500.
Commander Keen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 11:44 PM   #4537
G2Spfld
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 354284
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:
2013 Imp Sport CVT
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commander Keen View Post
148 HP moves the car nicely, though the final drive is a bit short for my liking.

I'd prefer a 60 MPH cruise at 1900 RPM rather than 2500.
I agree, however not sure the Tq curve of the 2.0 would handle a 1900 final drive. It'll shift with a wind direction change. I've never driven the 2.5, but I wonder how it would handle the final drive at 1900? They could probably tune the 2.0 to handle it, but it would prob drop mpg a notable amount.
G2Spfld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 11:45 PM   #4538
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 G2Spfld View Post
X2- interesting- the 2.5 legacy gets 35 real world with the CVT, but rated 32, but the 2.0 impreza rated at 36 gets 35 "real world" same as the 2.5 legacy? In thinking issue isn't CVT, the issue is the 2.0, and its lack of power.
Actually no complaints here that I've seen on the 5 speed, in fact Commander just blew the EPA estimate away (well, about like the typical car...) so it's the CVT.

No, you take the Legacy out of the mix above and the others are quite solidly in 35 mpg highway CR and 30 mpg highway EPA territories. A lot of bias error due to different test methodologies, but extremely small random error, which means the two tests are quite consistent, except for the Impreza CVT which is so far beyond left field it's in another county.

But, I think if the 5 speed was geared for 1900 rpm at 60 in 5th gear you wouldn't spend much time in 5th gear.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2013, 11:52 PM   #4539
G2Spfld
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 354284
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:
2013 Imp Sport CVT
SWP

Default

But there are many here also blowing the EPA away with the cvt. I'm curious as to why one needs to take the legacy out of the mix? It's EPA rated at 32, but real world achieves higher via CR test, then it supports your theory that the impreza isn't achieving higher than the EPA. But the fact its the 2.5 with the cvt. I'll buy your argument if your angle was the cvt 2.0, and not just the cvt. I understand the 5- sp is rated lower, and it gets lower. The cvt is higher rated EPA than the 5-sp and it gets higher than the 5-sp based on many on this board. So to me, the issue revolves more around the cvt mated with the 2.0 only, and not the cvt mated with the 2.5 as in the legacy.
G2Spfld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 12:19 AM   #4540
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

The Impreza is obviously an outlier, and if it's removed the Legacy is close to being an outlier as well. Since the measurement was made, if not on the same machine, at least by the same organization its result is questionable as well. Removing it too really tightens up the grouping, removing a lot of the random error.

And how many is "many" here? A half dozen? Most of the posts here praising the Impreza CVT are made by people driving 5 speeds.

I agree though about the 2.0 needing to be retuned. Also the CVT is not really optimizing because it will lock in to a consistent rpm at a speed and hold that rpm at that speed with minor grade changes. The combination of the 2.0 with the CVT as they are both tuned seems to indeed be the problem - in reality, if not in the artificial sequence called the "EPA test" that Subaru itself performs.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 01:17 AM   #4541
hi5.0
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 340456
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza

Default

Filled up a week ago. Worst avg. so far at 29 MPG. I blame the series of short trips (less than 5 mi./segment), the heavy traffic and the aggravating hunt for parking space since they've been having a lot of events in Waikiki these few weeks.
hi5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 03:41 AM   #4542
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

I forget - CVT or 5MT?

Also, why does Hawaii have an Interstate Highway?

stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 05:42 AM   #4543
flyboy1100
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:
2012 2.0i Sport 5MT
DGM

Default

Blah blah blah
flyboy1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 04:34 PM   #4544
Caocao
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 330507
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Ottawa
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Ltd CVT
White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hemophilic View Post
I think he's saying the imp is RATED 36, the legacy 32, and the real world difference is 1 mpg.
Yeah, i think you are correct but what i would like to know is the actual numbers.

Ocellaris, what were your actual MPGs for the Impreza? In the 30s, high or low 20s? Were are you located, relatively flat or mountainous terrain?
Caocao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 04:40 PM   #4545
Caocao
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 330507
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Ottawa
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Ltd CVT
White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
I forget - CVT or 5MT?

Also, why does Hawaii have an Interstate Highway?

Rule of thumb, cvt will get 3-5 mpg more then the manual! But you knew that already.
Caocao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 04:52 PM   #4546
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 Caocao View Post
Rule of thumb, cvt will get 3-5 mpg more then the manual! But you knew that already.
Only on the EPA machine...
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 04:54 PM   #4547
Caocao
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 330507
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Ottawa
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Ltd CVT
White

Default

Mine does
Caocao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 06:06 PM   #4548
G2Spfld
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 354284
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:
2013 Imp Sport CVT
SWP

Default

Most on here report cvt milage is good, and on avg better than 5 spd as it should. There are a few maybe that has hypermiled and received much higher, or blown it out of the water as was said earlier. But you can hypermile anything. A scientist forms a hypothesis, then sets out to prove or disprove it. It seems on here hypothesis are formed then making up this and that then adding this and removing that to prove it ans nothing to disprove it. That's all fine well and good. There are no rules against forming opinions, and that's what most all of this is. I think you can get good milage in a cvt or 5spd. I think the cvt in the impreza is more susceptible to reduced milage greater than expected from speed, hills, Ac, etc. If in fact the CR reports are as accurate as Stevehm says, and the list he had above is truly 35 mpg rated by CR as he says, then the CVT in the legacy 2.5 exceeded its EPA of 32. I know Stevehm wants it taken out of the conversation and then it leaves Subaru several deviations outside the other automakers. My thought is the CVT in the legacy rated at 32 received 35 by CR, assuming the CR tests are as credible as Stevehm claims, exceeded expectations in milage. I'm wondering if its not the cvt that's more susceptible to reduced milage, but maybe it being tuned as it is with the 2.0. It appears in the 2.5 to exceed its mark and in a larger car. So what about the impreza is different. Other than being lighter and smaller, the difference is the 2.0. I don't take much issue with it, I love my little impreza its just I think reducing engine size may not have helped much. I think it needs retuned, but the retuning of the 2.0 might strain it enough it gets much worse milage. They don't need to reduce the size of engines so much to be efficient.

Last edited by G2Spfld; 07-23-2013 at 08:18 PM.
G2Spfld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 08:41 PM   #4549
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 G2Spfld View Post
Most on here report cvt milage is good, and on avg better than 5 spd as it should.
The CVT does not necessarily avg better than the 5 speed in the real world. Here's another 5 speed driver who gets better than my CVT:
i get 31ish at 75mph. over 35mpg if i drop the speed to 60-65. lifetime is indicating 30.0mpg on the car, and my fuelly is 29.1. my normal driving i would say is 75% highway, 25% city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by G2Spfld View Post
I think the cvt in the impreza is more susceptible to reduced milage greater than expected from speed, hills, Ac, etc. If in fact the CR reports are as accurate as Stevehm says, and the list he had above is truly 35 mpg rated by CR as he says, then the CVT in the legacy 2.5 exceeded its EPA of 32.
I agree the Impreza appears more susceptible to reduced mileage due to real world conditions, but the testing methods are different, and the Legacy does not do as well as the others - in fact it's second only to the Impreza CVT as far as EPA rating difference from real world mpg.
Quote:
Originally Posted by G2Spfld View Post
I love my little impreza its just I think reducing engine size may not have helped much. I think it needs retuned, but the retuning of the 2.0 might strain it enough it gets much worse milage. They don't need to reduce the size of engines so much to be efficient.
I doubt if the retuning to optimize real world fuel economy would decrease the EPA mpg rating by more than one or two mpg, and it could get the same, relative to the real world, as other cars.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 09:06 PM   #4550
vwgti123
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 335945
Join Date: Oct 2012
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: West Islip NY
Vehicle:
2013 Sport Limited
Satin White Pearl

Default

WOW!!!! I will just add my .02 in a simple manner. The CVT in this car sucks. There is no sport in my sport limited and there is no great gas mileage either. How does anybody think the CVT is fun to drive, oh man. It is a crappy excuse for an economical solution but is actually an epic fail for real world driving. Paddle shifters are a joke - all they do is hurt the mileage while providing nothing. Uggh!
vwgti123 is offline   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
New Impreza owner, low mpg? stuffedcabbage Newbies & FAQs 34 09-25-2012 10:10 PM
2012 Impreza Reviewed - Whytecliff to Seymour brendan_mac Vancouver Impreza Club Forum -- VIC 16 12-23-2011 01:12 PM
NJ Impreza owners - sighting Dan G General Forum Archive 76 10-06-2000 12:24 AM
Md or Va Impreza owners - I have an Impreza related question. Snoopy General Forum Archive 1 06-05-2000 08:08 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:23 AM.


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.