Broke 60 mpg

[Idahotom]

My usual work commute is down the mountain (1,000' drop in a couple miles) and then 10 miles or so of secondary traffic free road I drive exactly at 47 mph (using the cruise) it's mostly level with some rolling parts. Today I did the trip to the crane yard, 13.3 miles, using .22 gallons, that is 60.45 mpg.

I had to do it twice today, and of course the trip back up the mountain is a reality check, still, the total today was 53.7 miles on 1.13 gallons of fuel, or 47.52 MPG. These are calibrated ScanGauge #'s, of course the fillup will tell the real story, but the last few fillups it has been right on.

[Klink10]

Outstanding.

[Idahotom]

My usual work commute is down the mountain (1,000' drop in a couple miles) and then 10 miles or so of secondary traffic free road I drive exactly at 47 mph (using the cruise) it's mostly level with some rolling parts. Today I did the trip to the crane yard, 13.3 miles, using .22 gallons, that is 60.45 mpg.

I had to do it twice today, and of course the trip back up the mountain is a reality check, still, the total today was 53.7 miles on 1.13 gallons of fuel, or 47.52 MPG. These are calibrated ScanGauge #'s, of course the fillup will tell the real story, but the last few fillups it has been right on.

I'm on a roll! I did my 13.3 miles today exactly at 70 mpg. That'd be .19 gallons of fuel, even better, the return trip up the mountain broke 50 mpg. That's the first time I've done the round trip and been able to hit 50.

[TEHxFALLEN V1.2]

I'm on a roll! I did my 13.3 miles today exactly at 70 mpg. That'd be .19 gallons of fuel, even better, the return trip up the mountain broke 50 mpg. That's the first time I've done the round trip and been able to hit 50.

Bull.

[Idahotom]

Bull.

What.... you calling BS? :smile:

It has been a consistant increase as I fine tune this route, and the ScanGauge came in right on at the last few fillups. Still I agree the real test is at the fillup, and yes I use the same station, same pump, same fill technique every time. The 1,000' drop the first couple miles helps A LOT, frankly I'm more pleased with the +50 mpg round trip number then I was with the one way 70. Though most of the commute is driven at a cruise controlled 47 MPH, the overall average speed is 35 to 37 MPH.

Another factor is the wind on this route: it's either a straight head wind or tailwind, as it runs down a small valley. I didn't notice the 70MPG day, but I'd have to think I had a tailwind going in, and the wind had died coming back, hours later. I may even had had a tailwind both ways, as we had a weather system move through in the several hours before heading back, and the local wind patterns often reverse when we go from a high to low pressure zone. Too much info?? So, short of a percent or two, due to whatever the ScanGauge, even finely calibrated, can accurately represent, I stand by these numbers. No bull, just the facts:iono:

[bobolinko]

Bro . . .

What's with the noise over a MEASLY BS 60MPG??? I get 99.9 MPG while I go down my 13mi hill every day. Sometimes I even get more if I turn off my motor. Heck... I sometimes even wake up after that drive.... :flame:

[mryaris]

I all honesty, it really doesn't matter what your single trip mileage is......get back to us when you average 50+ MPG's over an entire tank. That would be far more impressive.

I'm not hating......it's just that there are so many variables in short trips that the mileage figures get skewed to the point where they become worthless in evaluating fuel economy over the long run.

[Hershey]

Pics of the miles on trip A ( or B ) and the fuel gauge would help with proof . We use trip B for miles on the oil .

[Altitude]

I think it's funny that MPG discussion always bring about some contention. I was a bit bamboozled by some of the claims I have read before I bought mine. I can't get anywhere near some of the numbers reported, but I'm right at the manufacturer ratings so it's all good as far as I'm concerned.

High MPG numbers seem to only come with an ideal environment (mostly flat) and some use of hypermiling techniques (not hardcore). None of which I can take advantage of.

[nope1590]

I have to agree with some of the others here... 70 mpg downhill isn't incredibly braggable - you should be in triple digits quite easily in that scenario, especially when you can do the uphill at 50. Heck, I do better than that just coasting towards a red light.

50+ for an average is much more braggable. But to base a success story on a 13 mile segment is a little shortsighted.

Don't mean to be rude - just saying I'm sure you could do much better!

[Idahotom]

I refueled (finally), 10.48 gallons (yeah, I cut it pretty close, but I make a point of making it to the station in town that sells straight gas) 484.4 miles. So 46.22 MPG.

This was the same tank with my 70 MPG 13.3 mile/.19 gallon trip. It also had it's share of running around town, stop and go, and some interstate 60-65 mph + driving. I agree, 70 downhill ain't nothin, downhill is DFCO or triple digits, but my downhill is only 1.5 miles of my 13.3 mile commute.

Like I said earlier, I'm happiest with my over 50 MPG on my 33 mile work commute, that's UP and DOWN the mountain, and that's the drive I make the most. I'm not posting any pictures, you kidding me? Who's to say the picture ain't faked as to the info displayed!? One other thing, if someone was behind me, and there are other drivers using this highway, I was doing nothing that would be construed as "hyper mileing ass holeness", that is, not holding up traffic or otherwise being a pain to others. Well, except for my last mile where I coast from 47 down to my turnin speed, man the thing coasts great! BTW, the uphill run is less then 20 MPG at about 40 mph. And I didn't make that trip at over 50 mpg, it was combined milage with the 70 mpg down part. Read the posts and get the facts straight before ya comment, it saves us all time.

[1stToyota]

Pics of the miles on trip A ( or B ) and the fuel gauge would help with proof . We use trip B for miles on the oil .

I'm glad I thought of that. :wink: jk
I knew there must be a good use for trip B ... :w00t:

[nope1590]

even better, the return trip up the mountain broke 50 mpg.

Maybe you should be clearer with what you say (probably why TEHxFALLEN called BS on you originally)

Either way now that you have a full tank you can legitimately claim good numbers (not the bait-and-switch 60 the thread title claims). Those are the kind of numbers I strive for. Usually hit between 45-48 recently. Just changed the air filter, hoping that helps.

[Idahotom]

Maybe you should be clearer with what you say (probably why TEHxFALLEN called BS on you originally)

Either way now that you have a full tank you can legitimately claim good numbers (not the bait-and-switch 60 the thread title claims). Those are the kind of numbers I strive for. Usually hit between 45-48 recently. Just changed the air filter, hoping that helps.

I guess I'm fixated on the round trip commute numbers, and even the one way commute numbers, as it is always a good day when I can drive to the crane, do a job, and then drive home, without having to drive (further) into town! Another potentially misleading number:yesterday did 74 miles of rural roads, rolling and curvy, never over 45, and got 57 MPG. Agreed, no big deal, the fillup is where it's at mileage wise. But the fun thing about a calibrated ScanGauge are these little teasers, kind of like previews of a movie!

[nope1590]

Agreed. I think of it more like a game - getting the best score possible!

After I've driven a route often enough I know the good scores for each "section." Sometimes seeing anything below 60 is a disappointment and sometimes seeing anything above 40 is a cause for celebration.

And the end of the tank, I just like to see an average in the mid 40s.

[bkrownd]

We should have a ban on users reporting downhill MPG alone, without the return trip, or for anything less than 100 miles. :bs:

[Idahotom]

I agree, and that is why I went to some pains to clearly state (several times now) the mileage was ONE WAY, and the downhill section was only(measured) 1.5 miles of the 13.3 of my daily commute, the rest rolling and or flat. :iono: Did you even read my initial and following posts? They clearly, and reduntantly now, state just that. I wasn't trying to fool you'all, thought I'd made it abundantly clear how, where, and when it happened! My last response on this:smile:

[rick996]

We should have a ban on users reporting downhill MPG alone, without the return trip, or for anything less than 100 miles. :bs:

I think it should be full tanks only. I could easily plan a 100 trip that gives me much better MPG for show.

[33OH]

Still impressive numbers - keep it up! I drive through the Appalachians each day to/from work and am averaging about 45 per tank if I keep the A/C off. :)

[roadrunner]

To Idahotom............
What tires are you running on and at what pressure?

[Idahotom]

I THINK they are the stock tires, Goodyears Eagles, they came with it when I bought it used, (an 'O8 with 54 k miles.) They suck in the winter, I know that, but as I have to have 4x4 anyway, I revert back to the good old '89 Toyota All Trac, which now can rest all spring summer and fall while the Yaris gets a workout. Decent tread left, safe and legal anyway, but I'm looking forward to them being replaced with something better, rolling resistance wise they seem OK anyway.

I run them at 44 psi. No spare, jack, rear carpet and parcel cover thing, rear seat, and a small dog. I don't allow excess crap to build up, as I have that 1,000' climb every day.

[roadrunner]

When you do replace your Yaris tires, consider the Michelin Primacy MXV4.
An excellent tire for LRR, per TireRack and Consumers Reports. They are what I am putting on my Yaris this fall. I am now running on LRR Goodyear Integrity tires, which are ok, but nothing great. Have 5/32 on two, and 6/32 on the other two.

[Idahotom]

When you do replace your Yaris tires, consider the Michelin Primacy MXV4.
An excellent tire for LRR, per TireRack and Consumers Reports. They are what I am putting on my Yaris this fall. I am now running on LRR Goodyear Integrity tires, which are ok, but nothing great. Have 5/32 on two, and 6/32 on the other two.

I'll make a note of that, I've always liked Michelin tires anyway. Thanks

[charles nelson]

I read a hyper-miler boast that he puts his AT Yaris in neutral while descending hills. A Toyota mechanic told me that the best method was let the AT do the coasting...the computer will not shut off the injectors if in neutral! If the AT is in drive and coasting...the computer will completely shut off the injectors...

[nope1590]

I read a hyper-miler boast that he puts his AT Yaris in neutral while descending hills. A Toyota mechanic told me that the best method was let the AT do the coasting...the computer will not shut off the injectors if in neutral! If the AT is in drive and coasting...the computer will completely shut off the injectors...

It really depends on the situation. You are referring to DFCO which is covered extensively in other threads. DFCO and neutral coasting both have advantages. If I am looking to gain speed downhill, coasting is better because I can accelerate for free while only using the gas of idling. If I am already at my target speed, would need to use brakes, or slow down (stop light, tight turn, etc), DFCO is likely the better option because it will save on gas and brakes.

[bkrownd]

If the AT is in drive and coasting...the computer will completely shut off the injectors...

And your car will slow down faster - what us old people call "engine braking", not coasting. Only really useful if you want to be slowing down or holding back your speed while going downhill. (works super on long descents)

However I would not casually put an *automatic* transmission in neutral, IMHO. Don't trust automatics.

[theredone]

totally agreed. if that was the way we perceived what MPG actually means then all car manufacturers would say their models got 50+ MPG at the least!


I all honesty, it really doesn't matter what your single trip mileage is......get back to us when you average 50+ MPG's over an entire tank. That would be far more impressive.

I'm not hating......it's just that there are so many variables in short trips that the mileage figures get skewed to the point where they become worthless in evaluating fuel economy over the long run.

[gonzo452001]

I got 48 mpg once on my trip back home from work 35miles drove about 50 and took the car out of gear down the hills did it just to see how good it could do.I have got 46mpg's on a full tank a couple times just driving about 50

[STC]

I got 48 mpg once on my trip back home from work 35miles drove about 50 and took the car out of gear down the hills did it just to see how good it could do.I have got 46mpg's on a full tank a couple times just driving about 50

I get upper 40's to lower 50's consistently. I drive 40 to 50 MPH with 70% to 80% rural country roads.

Winter gas must be here in PA now! I'm getting 46-47 MPG...

Cheers! :smile:

[The Sin]

I think MPGs should always be based on a full tank of gas. I always fill up then drive till the gas gauage blinks. I know I still have at least 50 miles to find a gas station.