Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Saturday July 12, 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 03-09-2013, 12:39 PM   #26
subiTWO
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 273054
Join Date: Feb 2011
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza CVT HB

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ans2k View Post
man, i should have gotten the outback. same real world mpg, and more space and ground clearance. oh well

Wrong! My '12 Imp consistently gets 5+ mpg better than our '12 OB, year-round. Both with CVT, both driven by intelligent adults who know how to maximize mpg.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
subiTWO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2013, 01:54 PM   #27
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 subiTWO View Post
Wrong! My '12 Imp consistently gets 5+ mpg better than our '12 OB, year-round. Both with CVT, both driven by intelligent adults who know how to maximize mpg.
This is where variability comes in. CR rates the Outback at 32, the Impreza at 35. If you get "5+" with your Impreza (assuming you randomly switch back and forth with your other in driving), the odds are just about as good they would get the same in someone else's hands - and the Outback has definite advantages over the Impreza. (So not necessarily "wrong")
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2013, 05:42 PM   #28
jsteg
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329271
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Lady's Island, SC
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Limited
Ice Silver Metallic

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
the fact the CVT does not get the advertised MPG,

In the 200,000 miles I plan(ned?) to keep the car it will cost me an extra $5,000 extra dollars for fuel, since the real world EPA highway MPG should be 30 MPG.
Fact eh? I guess your expierence with your car and a few others having the same 'issue' is evidence enough to say that the CVT does NOT get the advertised MPG a FACT?!?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by 79letour View Post
Yep. And adding oil to it doesnt seem to bother them.
Maybe because they don't have to??

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post

Is it that the CVT Impreza was or is tuned specifically for Subaru's EPA test,
If so, I must have gotten one of the cars that were 'tuned' for the test.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
fact that the Impreza really gets mpg's of the other vehicles listed, and their EPA highway figure is consistently 30. Therefore the actual EPA figure should be 30, not 36. The $5,000+ refers to the additional money spent on the Impreza at the realistic 30 mpg compared to the claimed 36 mpg.
There's that word again, with no proof! I like how you always point out the $5000 extra it will cost you, but you fail to mention that that's based on gas prices that are well over a dollar a gallon more than current day instead of using real numbers. You also fail to mention that the 6 more MPG's you're crying about will only get you an additional 87 miles, and that is ONLY if you run your tank dry until the car dies from no gas every time. I doubt you'd let it get that low, so deduct 2.5 gallons assuming you'd fill at 12 gallons every time, and that's an extra whopping 72 miles per tank!!! WOW, incredible difference!! You like to use BIG numbers to make it look really bad, but spread out, it doesn't seem all that big of a deal. Say you had the car 10 years, which is 20k miles a year, even using your high figure of $5000 based on $5/gallon, that's only an extra 2.5 cents per mile, which is $1.37 (rounded up) per day of driving! Are you really going to be able to live better, and sleep better, and be happier in life over $1.37 per day??? Come on man!!!!!!!!!! You even said yourself your only complaint is the MPG's so, can you honestly not live a happy life without that $1.37 per day, knowing you like the car otherwise??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie-III View Post
Why is it that some cars can actual MPG's close to their claimed MPG's while the CVT is so far off.
This could be considered misleading/fraud.

We all know it's difficult to get what is claimed, so we accept we will be some amount less.
It's not fraud if everybody's not having the same experience, or even most people for that matter! We ALL know we'll get less? So....EVERY single CVT owner....EVERY one of them is getting less?? Not a single CVT owner is getting good MPG's??

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
It's only difficult with the CVT Impreza.
I don't find it difficult at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Drink View Post
most of the day on highways doing 70mph and very little time on side streets. Our car tells us we are only getting 25.5mpg. Wtf is that crap???
This is false advertisement and in a time when the economy is crap and people are trying to buy smart. ..........Subaru screwed us over.
Really man?!?! Averaging 70mph and you're pissed about 25+mpg??? You're out of your freakin' tree man!!!

Buying smart huh?? Most people, (especially with financial/accounting backgrounds) would agree that buying a new car, especially in a down and uncertain economy, is NOT a good investment.
jsteg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2013, 06:02 PM   #29
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 jsteg View Post
Fact eh? I guess your expierence with your car and a few others having the same 'issue' is evidence enough to say that the CVT does NOT get the advertised MPG a FACT?!?!
Did you forget to take your medicine today? You certainly can't read today. My statements are not because of my own personal experience, they're based on professional drivers at a well respected consumer advocate organization.

And I can break down the additional cost for you. You're correct, I just pulled $5/gallon out of thin air. Let's do some extrapolation based on the actual history. Figuring I will drive the Impreza the same miles per year as my current commuter, I see (from all over the web, you can use Google yourself, can't you) that the cost of gas when I bought the car in 2003 was $1.70 per gallon. Today it's about $3.67/gallon. Using that ratio the cost of gasoline will be $7.92 per gallon. So, taking the average over that time period, the cost of gas will be ... $5.80. I guess I'd better fix that huh?
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2013, 06:15 PM   #30
jsteg
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329271
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Lady's Island, SC
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Limited
Ice Silver Metallic

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post

Did you forget to take your medicine today? You certainly can't read today. My statements are not because of my own personal experience, they're based on professional drivers at a well respected consumer advocate organization.

And I can break down the additional cost for you. You're correct, I just pulled $5/gallon out of thin air. Let's do some extrapolation based on the actual history. Figuring I will drive the Impreza the same miles per year as my current commuter, I see (from all over the web, you can use Google yourself, can't you) that the cost of gas when I bought the car in 2003 was $1.70 per gallon. Today it's about $3.67/gallon. Using that ratio the cost of gasoline will be $7.92 per gallon. So, taking the average over that time period, the cost of gas will be ... $5.80. I guess I'd better fix that huh?
Obviously YOU can't read!!! You're saying it's a fact that the CVT gets bad mileage! The FACT is that not all CVT equipped imprezas are obtaining the numbers you are with your car. Just because a consumer advocate organization had lower than sticker numbers in their opinion (which by the way 29-43 is the expected range for most drivers) doesn't make it a fact that 'the cvt should be rated at 30 and not 36' or that Subaru falsely advertised. By the way, that same organization that got numbers similar to yours...guess what?? Even with so called 'low' mpg numbers, they still recommend the car!

You fall well within the advertised numbers, suck it up and get over it or get rid of the car!!!
jsteg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2013, 07:21 PM   #31
2012ISport
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 325924
Join Date: Jul 2012
Default

I honestly think the debate over fuel economy should end. There seems to be a group of people coming close to the epa estimates and many of us that don't even come close. Those who are happy certainly do not have the answers so those who are unhappy should file the necessary complaints and have their dealer perform the recommended tests.
2012ISport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2013, 07:41 PM   #32
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 2012ISport View Post
I honestly think the debate over fuel economy should end. There seems to be a group of people coming close to the epa estimates and many of us that don't even come close. Those who are happy certainly do not have the answers so those who are unhappy should file the necessary complaints and have their dealer perform the recommended tests.
I don't agree. As long as they keep selling Imprezas that get the same mpg's as a solid grouping of cars that are advertised "for comparison purposes" as getting 30 mpg highway EPA, indicating a very consistent offset which means that "for comparison purposes" the car should be rated at 30 mpg highway EPA.

Every day they're ripping somebody off.

Sure, some people get better mpg and some worse. I can get 50 mpg if I drive slowly enough on a flat level road with no headwind. Different driving styles, different geography, different roadways, they all make for different fuel consumption. However, when you get the pro's doing the comparison it means many times more than the anecdotes here.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2013, 07:47 PM   #33
BigFatHorse
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 328167
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Utah
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza MT PZEV
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
Other than the fuel economy, this is a great car. However, there has been much discussion in other threads about the fact the CVT does not get the advertised MPG, backed up by this observation:

The fact that Consumer Reports has tested several vehicles that get the same highway mpg, yet are rated consistently lower. Very consistently. The sedan (at CR's 35 mpg) is particularly woeful, as the other cars are rated at 30 +/- 2 MPG EPA highway, yet still get the same mpg in real world testing, with a tight spread. The actual numbers are a mean of 29.9 MPG with a standard deviation of 1.311, meaning the 36 mpg EPA highway rating by Subaru is so far out in left field that it is 4.63 standard deviations away from the crowd. This means that if there were a half million cars in this same spread, the Subaru Impreza would have a better than 50/50 chance of being the worst.

So, the question is, how can Subaru improve the fuel economy of the Impreza? In the 200,000 miles I plan(ned?) to keep the car it will cost me an extra $5,000 extra dollars for fuel, since the real world EPA highway MPG should be 30 MPG.

I got the information here:

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/c...erformance.htm

and the actual data is this:

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
I downloaded all of the fuelly information for the 2012/2013 Impreza CVT and all twelve of these other cars and then ran some numbers.

The mean fuelly mpg for the 2012/2013 Impreza CVT is 27.1mpg. Mean fuelly mpg of the other twelve cars listed is 25.3. ANOVA between the two classes gives us a p-value of 0.0004, so according to ANOVA the difference between the two classes is statistically significant.

Calculating a cumulative histogram shows that ~23% of Impreza CVT drivers on fuelly are averaging 30mpg or better. If we drop to 28mpg or better the percentage grows to 54.3%.

Here is a histogram comparing the two classes:


If you want to run your own numbers you can download my data here.
BigFatHorse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2013, 08:20 PM   #34
subiTWO
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 273054
Join Date: Feb 2011
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza CVT HB

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
This is where variability comes in. CR rates the Outback at 32, the Impreza at 35. If you get "5+" with your Impreza (assuming you randomly switch back and forth with your other in driving), the odds are just about as good they would get the same in someone else's hands - and the Outback has definite advantages over the Impreza. (So not necessarily "wrong")

No, it's WRONG. The OB is MUCH heavier, has MUCH more air resistance, and has a more inefficient and larger engine. Under identical driving conditions, it HAS to get worse mileage. The only way this could change, is if you have an Imp that's defective.
subiTWO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2013, 08:38 PM   #35
subiTWO
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 273054
Join Date: Feb 2011
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza CVT HB

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post

...

Every day they're ripping somebody off.
...

This attitude is what pisses off so many of us. Subaru isn't ripping off anyone. Subaru has produced a wonderful small car, AND it gets great mileage FOR AN AWD drivetrain. Any rational comparison would be to other, similar cars, but the few constant whiners never do that. They take ONE factor of the EPA's *synthetic* test as an exact promise of what everyone should get for mileage. Those of us who are thinking about the car, and testing MPG stratagies, have found that the CVT needs to be warm for best MPG. We've found that raising the speed a bit has a larger negative impact that we've seen in other vehicles. We've shown that accelerating harder than the EPA did hits MPG hard. And that the nature of the CVT HIDES how much harder people are accelerating without realizing it, because there's no off-accel/on-accel lurch from shifting gears.

When I can get a full tank at 37 mpg, commuting to work, Subaru did it's job. I accept that there will be a handful of defective Imps, that will get horrible mileage. Those owners should be talking with their dealers.

The s**t-stirrers should be made to drive old chrysler vehicles...
subiTWO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2013, 08:46 PM   #36
Purple Drink
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 237470
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Grand Prairie, TX.
Vehicle:
2007 Varis WB STI
P. Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsteg View Post
Fact eh? I guess your expierence with your car and a few others having the same 'issue' is evidence enough to say that the CVT does NOT get the advertised MPG a FACT?!?!



Maybe because they don't have to??



If so, I must have gotten one of the cars that were 'tuned' for the test.



There's that word again, with no proof! I like how you always point out the $5000 extra it will cost you, but you fail to mention that that's based on gas prices that are well over a dollar a gallon more than current day instead of using real numbers. You also fail to mention that the 6 more MPG's you're crying about will only get you an additional 87 miles, and that is ONLY if you run your tank dry until the car dies from no gas every time. I doubt you'd let it get that low, so deduct 2.5 gallons assuming you'd fill at 12 gallons every time, and that's an extra whopping 72 miles per tank!!! WOW, incredible difference!! You like to use BIG numbers to make it look really bad, but spread out, it doesn't seem all that big of a deal. Say you had the car 10 years, which is 20k miles a year, even using your high figure of $5000 based on $5/gallon, that's only an extra 2.5 cents per mile, which is $1.37 (rounded up) per day of driving! Are you really going to be able to live better, and sleep better, and be happier in life over $1.37 per day??? Come on man!!!!!!!!!! You even said yourself your only complaint is the MPG's so, can you honestly not live a happy life without that $1.37 per day, knowing you like the car otherwise??



It's not fraud if everybody's not having the same experience, or even most people for that matter! We ALL know we'll get less? So....EVERY single CVT owner....EVERY one of them is getting less?? Not a single CVT owner is getting good MPG's??



I don't find it difficult at all.



Really man?!?! Averaging 70mph and you're pissed about 25+mpg??? You're out of your freakin' tree man!!!

Buying smart huh?? Most people, (especially with financial/accounting backgrounds) would agree that buying a new car, especially in a down and uncertain economy, is NOT a good investment.
Yes, when you are getting out of a gas eatting truck or v8 it for some people is a good investment. Not saying that is me but a lot of people do purchase off those mpg numbers. And yes hwys in Texas are 70mph. Subaru claims 33hwy/25city ??? I'd at least like to see 29-30 not 25.5. Thank god I don't drive all the time in the city.... It probably get the same mpg as my Sti with 1400cc injectors. And let me say again before you jump on my back, I love my subarus. Would I had bought the xv if it claimed 23/29? Yes I would have.... The mpg didnt mean too much to me because Subaru makes some darn good cars. But I still don't like the fact that their claim of 25/33 and it's that far off. It's wrong.
Purple Drink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2013, 08:53 PM   #37
BigFatHorse
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 328167
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Utah
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza MT PZEV
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 79letour View Post
I've had two 2012 Outbacks as loaners anf they absolutely did as well as my Impreza on mpg's. I also had a cvt impreza loaner. Hated the cvt, but it did a little better on mpg's than my 5mt.
MPG's are one aspect of the subaru I'm very pleased with. But I live like 25 miles from Disney World, so I dont have snow, mountains, or snowy mountains to kill mpgs.
Even on the gently rolling hills here, the mileage goes way down with any amount of incline.
Here in Fl, the real mpg killer is the A/C. It decreases mpg's dramatically. I did expect some decrease in efficiency but not 5+ mpg loss!
Average mpg for 2012/2013 Impreza (both transmissions) on fuelly is 27.4mpg.
Average mpg for 2012/2013 Outback 2.5 (both transmissions) on fuelly is 24.29mpg.
BigFatHorse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2013, 10:08 PM   #38
jsteg
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329271
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Lady's Island, SC
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Limited
Ice Silver Metallic

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
My statements are not because of my own personal experience, they're based on professional drivers at a well respected consumer advocate organization.

Here's one...........

Quote:
Originally Posted by sgoldste01 View Post
Here's the latest Motorweek update on their long-term Impreza test car:

Date: February 2013

Mileage: 16,000

We're having a lot of fun driving our long term 2012 Subaru Impreza, and that’s something we’ve never said before about a non-WRX version.

Our initial concerns the 2.0i Sport hatchback's smaller 148-horsepower I4 being anemic were displaced with the first jab of the throttle. There's good power even if the CVT transmission whines a lot.

Long idling on cold mornings, and a lot of city use, have recently taken a toll on fuel economy. Still an average of 28.6 miles per gallon of regular after nearly 16,000 miles, is fine for any all-wheel drive hatchback.

Seats get high marks for overall support and comfort, but the dull interior, and cumbersome Nav radio, really saps your spirit on a long drive. We wouldn’t ask friends to ride in the back seat for long periods either; too hard. But they fold easily for a wagon’s worth of cargo room.

So in the end, the Subaru Impreza, continues to impress us a lot.


I'm surprised to read that they think the back seats are too hard. I thought rear-seat comfort was a strong point for the Impreza. Or is it just the Limited's leather seats that are hard?
jsteg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2013, 10:10 PM   #39
jsteg
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329271
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Lady's Island, SC
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Limited
Ice Silver Metallic

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Drink View Post
Yes, when you are getting out of a gas eatting truck or v8 it for some people is a good investment.

The only way that would be true is if you were still making payments on the truck or any other gas guzzler. If you owned it outright, there's no way the fuel savings will outweigh the payment on the new car....this is why my wife still drives a 2003 F-150 that gets 17mpg.
jsteg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 12:03 AM   #40
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

That would depend on how much you drive. After 200k miles on my 2003 Corolla at 35-40 mpg (coincidentally also rated, post 2008, at 36 mpg highway), I've spent right at what I would have spent after an additional 200k miles on my 4Runner at 20 mpg - including buying the Corolla.

It is a close call though, and definitely one where the scales frequently tip somewhere between 36 mpg and 30-32 mpg.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 12:12 AM   #41
Purple Drink
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 237470
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Grand Prairie, TX.
Vehicle:
2007 Varis WB STI
P. Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
That would depend on how much you drive. After 200k miles on my 2003 Corolla at 35-40 mpg (coincidentally also rated, post 2008, at 36 mpg highway), I've spent right at what I would have spent after an additional 200k miles on my 4Runner at 20 mpg - including buying the Corolla.

It is a close call though, and definitely one where the scales frequently tip somewhere between 36 mpg and 30-32 mpg.
Thank you
Purple Drink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 06:15 AM   #42
jsteg
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329271
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Lady's Island, SC
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Limited
Ice Silver Metallic

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
That would depend on how much you drive. After 200k miles on my 2003 Corolla at 35-40 mpg (coincidentally also rated, post 2008, at 36 mpg highway), I've spent right at what I would have spent after an additional 200k miles on my 4Runner at 20 mpg - including buying the Corolla.

It is a close call though, and definitely one where the scales frequently tip somewhere between 36 mpg and 30-32 mpg.
What do the ratings after 2008 have to do with your 2003 corolla???
jsteg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 06:35 AM   #43
79letour
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 302570
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: dear old dixie
Vehicle:
2013 XV
DGM!

Default

Jsteg you apparently dont follow CR.
THEY HAD A LOW OIL LIGHT AND HAD QUITE A TIME FINDING OIL, ONCE THEY READ THE MANUAL AND DISCOVERED THAT IT REQUIRES 0W20.
Why would you say that they didnt? Pretty much everyone has seen it.
God forbid anyone be dissatisfied with any aspect of their overly-hyped car...

Last edited by 79letour; 03-10-2013 at 06:46 AM.
79letour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 07:22 AM   #44
Guzzi 1
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 338666
Join Date: Nov 2012
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Northeast Ohio
Vehicle:
2014 Impreza Limited
SWP/Blk Leather CVT

Default

I'm getting what they said out of mine. I'm happy. So far, with a bit over 4000 miles, I have yet to need to add oil. Who knows if that will change.

As for payments, I traded a paid off '03 WRX for this car. I realize I could have continued to feed premium into the old car for less than my payment, but the fact remains I still had a 10 year old car. How many more years before the car starts to show its age? (Lots of salt used here in winter.) With a car payment, I now have a brand new car with a warranty, and I got a decent amount for my old car, (which I loved BTW). Insurance increased 24 dollars per year over the 10 year old car. That is nothing. I'm putting regular rather than premium in now. My daily drive is in the high 20's. I get better than the 36 published when I hit the highway and set the cruise, which is infrequent, but still.... My WRX was around 22mpg on my daily drive. 29/30 on the highway. That's an 8 mpg difference. About the same difference as the new car.

I agree with others that argue that if you're going to compare cars, do it apples to apples. AWD/4WD. If you didn't need AWD there are several other better choices that would yield higher numbers. You should have gotten a Focus or something.

There are many happy with their numbers. As stated, we don't have answers for those that are not happy. I said some time ago that we need to assemble a group of cars, half of which are happy owners and half of which are unhappy. Put the same fuel in and drive the same route for some period to see how the numbers are between the two groups. If the numbers are aligned, then driving habbits are likely the factor, rather than the car itself. If there is still a disparity, then those owners would have ammunition to go back to Subaru with.

John
Guzzi 1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 11:03 AM   #45
jsteg
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329271
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Lady's Island, SC
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Limited
Ice Silver Metallic

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 79letour View Post
Jsteg you apparently dont follow CR.
THEY HAD A LOW OIL LIGHT AND HAD QUITE A TIME FINDING OIL, ONCE THEY READ THE MANUAL AND DISCOVERED THAT IT REQUIRES 0W20.
Why would you say that they didnt? Pretty much everyone has seen it.
God forbid anyone be dissatisfied with any aspect of their overly-hyped car...
When did I ever say that consumer reports didn't have to add oil? And why was it so hard to find 0w20 oil anyways? Every auto parts store carries it, it's been on the market for years now!
jsteg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 11:06 AM   #46
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 Guzzi 1 View Post
I'm getting what they said out of mine. I'm happy. So far, with a bit over 4000 miles, I have yet to need to add oil. Who knows if that will change.

As for payments, I traded a paid off '03 WRX for this car. I realize I could have continued to feed premium into the old car for less than my payment, but the fact remains I still had a 10 year old car. How many more years before the car starts to show its age? (Lots of salt used here in winter.) With a car payment, I now have a brand new car with a warranty, and I got a decent amount for my old car, (which I loved BTW). Insurance increased 24 dollars per year over the 10 year old car. That is nothing. I'm putting regular rather than premium in now. My daily drive is in the high 20's. I get better than the 36 published when I hit the highway and set the cruise, which is infrequent, but still.... My WRX was around 22mpg on my daily drive. 29/30 on the highway. That's an 8 mpg difference. About the same difference as the new car.

I agree with others that argue that if you're going to compare cars, do it apples to apples. AWD/4WD. If you didn't need AWD there are several other better choices that would yield higher numbers. You should have gotten a Focus or something.

There are many happy with their numbers. As stated, we don't have answers for those that are not happy. I said some time ago that we need to assemble a group of cars, half of which are happy owners and half of which are unhappy. Put the same fuel in and drive the same route for some period to see how the numbers are between the two groups. If the numbers are aligned, then driving habbits are likely the factor, rather than the car itself. If there is still a disparity, then those owners would have ammunition to go back to Subaru with.

John
The problem with having the two groups go out on the same route is that the low MPG crowd are going to arrive at the finish line well before the other group, and they hate waiting around (their time is precious, so they cannot drive slower and waste any more of it than necessary)...
Zeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 11:22 AM   #47
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 Guzzi 1 View Post

I agree with others that argue that if you're going to compare cars, do it apples to apples. AWD/4WD.
I'm not comparing cars for mpg. Consumer Reports is comparing cars. EPA is (telling manufacturers to test for) comparing cars. I am only looking at their comparisons.

Look at the 2013 RAV4 (for mpg comparison, not for purchase comparison). In the EPA test the 2WD gets 31 mpg highway, the AWD gets 29 mpg highway. To compare fuel consumption you would check multiple cars at e.g. 29 mpg. It doesn't matter in terms of fuel usage if the other vehicles are 2WD or AWD. They are rated at 29 mpg.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 12:17 PM   #48
79letour
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 302570
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: dear old dixie
Vehicle:
2013 XV
DGM!

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsteg View Post
Fact eh? I guess your expierence with your car and a few others having the same 'issue' is evidence enough to say that the CVT does NOT get the advertised MPG a FACT?!?!



Maybe because they don't have to??



If so, I must have gotten one of the cars that were 'tuned' for the test.



There's that word again, with no proof! I like how you always point out the $5000 extra it will cost you, but you fail to mention that that's based on gas prices that are well over a dollar a gallon more than current day instead of using real numbers. You also fail to mention that the 6 more MPG's you're crying about will only get you an additional 87 miles, and that is ONLY if you run your tank dry until the car dies from no gas every time. I doubt you'd let it get that low, so deduct 2.5 gallons assuming you'd fill at 12 gallons every time, and that's an extra whopping 72 miles per tank!!! WOW, incredible difference!! You like to use BIG numbers to make it look really bad, but spread out, it doesn't seem all that big of a deal. Say you had the car 10 years, which is 20k miles a year, even using your high figure of $5000 based on $5/gallon, that's only an extra 2.5 cents per mile, which is $1.37 (rounded up) per day of driving! Are you really going to be able to live better, and sleep better, and be happier in life over $1.37 per day??? Come on man!!!!!!!!!! You even said yourself your only complaint is the MPG's so, can you honestly not live a happy life without that $1.37 per day, knowing you like the car otherwise??



It's not fraud if everybody's not having the same experience, or even most people for that matter! We ALL know we'll get less? So....EVERY single CVT owner....EVERY one of them is getting less?? Not a single CVT owner is getting good MPG's??



I don't find it difficult at all.



Really man?!?! Averaging 70mph and you're pissed about 25+mpg??? You're out of your freakin' tree man!!!

Buying smart huh?? Most people, (especially with financial/accounting backgrounds) would agree that buying a new car, especially in a down and uncertain economy, is NOT a good investment.
In there. You imply that they never ha a low oil light. I never said 0w20 was hard to find. CR did.
79letour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 12:26 PM   #49
auskip07
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 315643
Join Date: Apr 2012
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Atlanta Ga
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Sedan
DGM 5mt

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vwgti123 View Post
Subaru of America, INC.
Subaru Plaza
PO Box 6000
Cherry Hill, NJ 08034

1-800-SUBARU3 1-800-782-2783

Wolverines!!


Thanks Im going to call and tell them just how impressed i am with the car and its price then offer up a few suggestions on where to improve the vehicle
auskip07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 12:27 PM   #50
79letour
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 302570
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: dear old dixie
Vehicle:
2013 XV
DGM!

Default

The "Maybe because they dont have to". Line two.
79letour 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


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:24 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.