MT vs AT----fuel efficiency

[bentjazz]

Hi Yarisworlders,

Generally how many more miles per gallon does a MT get compared to an AT on a Yaris? Just curious....

[Em_]

not much more it's about the same
i have a 2005 echo 1.5 a/t and 2007 yaris 1.5 m/t both are doing the about same mileage

[why?]

driving style makes more of a difference than transmission type. Long gone are the days when autos got 5 or more fewer mpg's than manuals.

The Yaris auto seems to do really well.

[aussie muzza]

I completely agree with what Mr why? said above - driving style has more to do with economy that anything else. My '07 auto sedan regularly returns anywhere from 36 - 42 mpg. I also have a large auto 6 cylinder Australian car (4 litre Ford Falcon Wagon) and on a recent 3000km trip, with 3 people, luggage and other gear it returned just over 30mpg. I was driving for economy. When I tow with the Ford it can go as low as 18mpg. It matters most how you drive. The Yaris is a brilliant car in all respects regardless of auto or manual gears.

[Hershey]

Was up to 45 m.p.g. :biggrin: at about 32 miles after fill up and ended up with 40.2 when arrived home :frown: . The mileage dropped when doing city driving thanks to stop lights , stop signs , etc. :mad: . This is the '08 base model sedan with the automatic . Conditions were 2 people , winds of 17 m.p.h. , temp of 33 , Blizzak WS70 tires at 34.5 p.s.i. , Shell full synthetic 5w-30 , and winter blend of 87 octane w/E10 . Always stop at 1 click of the gas nozzle . Eco-Meter is set at 94 , so gas mileage may be a bit more .

[bronsin]

Have to disagree here.

First the operating conditions.

Both cars are primarily driven to work 6.5 miles there and 6.5 miles back. City driving.

The 2001 ECHO mt got 40 mpg in summer and 36-38 mpg in winter. Driving it to AC @ 60-65 mph it got 50-53 mpg several times.

The Yaris at gets 34-36 mpg in summer and 28-32 mpg in winter. I am currently experimenting with adding heat to the engine before startup in winter to improve mpg. Some preliminary findings soon...

On its trip to AK last summer in the US going 80-85 mph on interstates the car got 34 mpg. Later on in Canada where the speed limits are typically 62 mph (and I didnt want to test the authorities) the car got 42-44 mpg.

The only fly in the ointment might be the percentage of alcohol in the gas which might be greater now.

Oh and the 5200 miles to AK the engine used regular Walmart oil. On the trip back Mobile 1. There was no difference in mpg.

[baseballfan416]

Driving style is important but 5speeds have a higher potential for peak mpg's. I've gotten as high as 49mpg on a tank, I average 44 in the summer and about 38-40 in the winter (totaling close to 22,000miles of data, spanning a little over a year). There are people on this forum doing low to mid-50's with mt's (check out fully.com for others). Very few auto's do more than 40 in even ideal conditions. Having driven an auto-tragic yaris before, one can't pulse/glide in it, and the gearing isn't conducive for light throttle position because it constantly changes gear to build revs in an anemic power band. Whereas with the 5speed, you can drive cruising speeds at lower revs (particularly in the 35-45mph range where you can be in overdrive and not bog down), as well as coast out of gear to stop lights/downhill (braking and decel technology improve mpg by a mere 10%).

Just my biased 2cents...

[BEEF]

one other thing is the automatic keeps you from going into overdrive until the coolant temp gets high enough (the little light goes off).

I typically shift at 2k and am in 5th gear by 35mph. most of my commute is 50mph.

for people driving shorter trips, this could be a factor.

[bronsin]

one other thing is the automatic keeps you from going into overdrive until the coolant temp gets high enough (the little light goes off).

I typically shift at 2k and am in 5th gear by 35mph. most of my commute is 50mph.

for people driving shorter trips, this could be a factor.

Yep that why we have the mod to allow the at to shift into 4th right away without waiting for the coolant light to go out.

It takes about a mile for my cool light to go out on a 30 degree morning. So if youre drive is ~ 5 miles to work 20% of the time youre potentially in 3rd instead of 4th.

Could be a problem...

[bentjazz]

Thanks for the posts, guys.
The ONLY reason I got the AT is because my mom is older and even though she has a low mileage car, her car is old. Who knows how long it will last. And if her car goes out, she doesn't know how to drive a stick. So, in that event I thought she could share mine. Next car will be a MT, for sure.

[TRDMarty]

I get 41 MPG with my A/T Hatchback

[bentjazz]

I don't know. Fuelly seems to say the MT Yaris does better than the AT Yaris. Woe is me....

[bronsin]

It does. Brake pads going to last longer too of you let off on the gas before you need to brake. And a MT car is more controllable in slippery conditions than an AT one. It slows down faster with your foot off the gas.

[bentjazz]

I'm sorry, I meant to say True Delta shows clearly that the MT does better than the AT in the Yaris in real world reporting.....
At any rate, filled up my AT Yaris today and got 35.91mpg. Not bad. Would have probably been 40mpg with the manual.....
:-(

[why?]

Have to disagree here.

First the operating conditions.

Both cars are primarily driven to work 6.5 miles there and 6.5 miles back. City driving.

The 2001 ECHO mt got 40 mpg in summer and 36-38 mpg in winter. Driving it to AC @ 60-65 mph it got 50-53 mpg several times.

The Yaris at gets 34-36 mpg in summer and 28-32 mpg in winter. I am currently experimenting with adding heat to the engine before startup in winter to improve mpg. Some preliminary findings soon...

On its trip to AK last summer in the US going 80-85 mph on interstates the car got 34 mpg. Later on in Canada where the speed limits are typically 62 mph (and I didnt want to test the authorities) the car got 42-44 mpg.

The only fly in the ointment might be the percentage of alcohol in the gas which might be greater now.

Oh and the 5200 miles to AK the engine used regular Walmart oil. On the trip back Mobile 1. There was no difference in mpg.

you cannot compare an echo to a yaris. They do not compare at all. The Yaris gearing and final drive is different. Toyota decided they wanted the Yaris to have 104 hp, so they sacrificed mpg's. No Yaris does as well as an echo with the same driver/conditions etc.

[bronsin]

Isnt the echos engine and drivetrain identical?

[Em_]

yes it is i don't get the other statement

[FrankM]

i had a 97 tercel i got 40MPG all the time as high as 48 MPG ,it was a stick, my 08 yaris ,auto tranny, the best i have got is 35 MPG when i got the yaris i was sure i would get 40 MPG ore close , , the new Hundi gets 47 MPG , that may be my next car .

[why?]

Isnt the echos engine and drivetrain identical?

yes it is i don't get the other statement

no it is not. The engine is the same.

they are closer than I thought though. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_C_transmission)

I wonder if the final drives will swap easy enough to change it.
The echo used the C150 gearbox, with ratios of
3.555/1.904/1.310/0.969/.815 reverse:3.250final=4.05
The Yaris is the C50:
3.545/1.904/1.310/0.969/.815/Final Drive: 3.722
Reverse: 3.250

as anyone who plays GT can tell you, the final drive makes a gigantic difference. In this case, it is the complete difference between the Echo's 99hp rating and the Yaris' 105. That and the extra 100+ lbs the Yaris has over the Echo tells why the Yaris won't get the same gas mileage.
sources:
http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=252
https://www.google.com/search?q=toyota+yaris+gear+ratio&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
http://www.vibratesoftware.com/html_help/2011/Toyota/1997-2011_Toyota_Transmissions.htm#C150
http://www.vibratesoftware.com/html_help/2011/Toyota/2003/2003_Toyota_Echo.htm
https://www.google.com/search?q=toyota+echo&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=TnX&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&sclient=psy-ab&q=toyota+echo+gear+ratios&oq=toyota+echo+gear+ratios&aq=f&aqi=g-v1&aql=&gs_l=serp.3..0i15.26512l28298l1l28465l10l6l0l4l4l3 l305l1272l0j3j2j1l10l0.frgbld.&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=5f2ea5a37464f59c&biw=911&bih=383

[joe keeney]

Texas full air 80 or 90 out here in the middle of nowhere 32 mpg. Love this car made to drive.

[bronsin]

Thanks for that I didnt know.

So which final drive gives you better mpg the 3 point something or the 4 point something?

I guess the auto tranmissions are the same?



no it is not. The engine is the same.

they are closer than I thought though. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_C_transmission)

I wonder if the final drives will swap easy enough to change it.
The echo used the C150 gearbox, with ratios of
3.555/1.904/1.310/0.969/.815 reverse:3.250final=4.05
The Yaris is the C50:
3.545/1.904/1.310/0.969/.815/Final Drive: 3.722
Reverse: 3.250

as anyone who plays GT can tell you, the final drive makes a gigantic difference. In this case, it is the complete difference between the Echo's 99hp rating and the Yaris' 105. That and the extra 100+ lbs the Yaris has over the Echo tells why the Yaris won't get the same gas mileage.
sources:
http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=252
https://www.google.com/search?q=toyota+yaris+gear+ratio&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
http://www.vibratesoftware.com/html_help/2011/Toyota/1997-2011_Toyota_Transmissions.htm#C150
http://www.vibratesoftware.com/html_help/2011/Toyota/2003/2003_Toyota_Echo.htm
https://www.google.com/search?q=toyota+echo&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=TnX&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&sclient=psy-ab&q=toyota+echo+gear+ratios&oq=toyota+echo+gear+ratios&aq=f&aqi=g-v1&aql=&gs_l=serp.3..0i15.26512l28298l1l28465l10l6l0l4l4l3 l305l1272l0j3j2j1l10l0.frgbld.&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=5f2ea5a37464f59c&biw=911&bih=383

[broody]

From experience, the yaris and echo have the same gearing, they both reach 65mph or so in 2nd gear. But I'm talking about the echo hatchback 2004-2005 (Canada), maybe that the sedan has shorter gearing, I know it was the case with the Civic EK. And the echo was always rated at 105hp or 108hp, I never heard of 99hp.

And from this source, the final drive of the echo is 3.526
http://www.new-cars.com/2004/toyota/toyota-echo-specs.html

[bronsin]

Me neither always 106 hp ECHO and Yaris.

[why?]

http://www.vibratesoftware.com/html_help/2011/Toyota/2005/2005_Toyota_Echo.htm

This link is the best to describe that link. Differential ratio is not final drive. The Yaris differential ratio is 3.722 according tothis. (http://www.vibratesoftware.com/html_help/2011/Toyota/2007/2007_Toyota_Yaris.htm)

the last year of the echo sedan in the us, when they changed the rating system, the echo was 99hp. I cannot find a link that mentions this, but it is what I remembered. Toyota changed the final drive to bop it back to 105(i assume).

The 4.05 gets better gas mileage. Basically for a car with as little hp as the Yaris and echo, the higher the final drive the harder it is to accelerate. What is funny though is since the Yaris came in at 2365 and the Echo at 2055, the Echo was faster too.
fun stuff to look @ http://www.insideline.com/toyota/yaris/2007/full-test-2007-toyota-yaris-s.htmlhttp://autos.aol.com/cars-compare?cur_page=details&v1=USB50TOC092A0&v2=USB50HYC012A0&v3=USB50CHC161B0&v4=USB50KIC031A0&v5=USB50SCC011A0

[broody]

You didn't find any mention of that 99hp echo because there is no such a thing, and the gearing won't affect the peak HP.

[bronsin]

QUOTE The 4.05 gets better gas mileage. Basically for a car with as little hp as the Yaris and echo,...QUOTE

Hmm. In 1972 the BMW 2002 FI had 100 hp and was considered the fastest, most outrageous, hippest sporty little sedan you could buy.

I wonder what people then would make of the ECHO were it to go there? It gets 106 hp from 1.5 liters, something then unheard of.

Yet a common description today of the ECHO is POS.

[gray09S-hatch]

I dont uderstand i cant get better than 29mpg in my 09 at hatch ? Its a mix of hwy and city and i just took a 400 hwy trip and at 85mph most of they way i got 29mpg also

[bronsin]

My 09 hatch with auto gets similiar mpg at 85 mph.

It gets 40 mpg+ at 60-65.

[gray09S-hatch]

My 09 hatch with auto gets similiar mpg at 85 mph.

It gets 40 mpg+ at 60-65.

ok so these guys who are getting 40mpg + are driving 60-65 tops

[why?]

You didn't find any mention of that 99hp echo because there is no such a thing, and the gearing won't affect the peak HP.

Gearing does effect hp measurements. The engine is not in a vacuum, that power gets pushed through the transmission, which changes it completely with each new gear. GT shows this wonderfully.A great read on dynos. (http://www.sdsefi.com/techdyno.htm)

There is a reason tuners use the gear closest to 1:1 for dyno runs.

Now if you mean the engineers, using an engine only dyno, then you are right, since no transmission is hooked up gearing won't matter.

Now again, I highly doubt I am wrong. When I remember things like this I am usually right. Frankly though it is totally beside the main point of gas mileage.
QUOTE The 4.05 gets better gas mileage. Basically for a car with as little hp as the Yaris and echo,...QUOTE

Hmm. In 1972 the BMW 2002 FI had 100 hp and was considered the fastest, most outrageous, hippest sporty little sedan you could buy.

I wonder what people then would make of the ECHO were it to go there? It gets 106 hp from 1.5 liters, something then unheard of.

Yet a common description today of the ECHO is POS.

While the Echo was ugly, it was not a pos. At least no one with a brain called it that. And times change. Some of the most fun cars to drive today are the ones weighing the least, and need less hp to truly be fun. Now personally I love the way the Echo hatch looks.

Colin Chapman is 100% right when he said,"add lightness."

I dont uderstand i cant get better than 29mpg in my 09 at hatch ? Its a mix of hwy and city and i just took a 400 hwy trip and at 85mph most of they way i got 29mpg also

You need to slow down.
ok so these guys who are getting 40mpg + are driving 60-65 tops

I doubt they even go that fast. I know when I hit 40+ mpg I barely ever hit 55. You have to drive as slow as you can, and then figure out how to go slower. Plus accelerating and decelerating as slowly as possible as well. The brakes are your enemy. I tell people they need to drive like there is a hand grenade waiting to go off the second you hit the brakes. It makes the way you use the accelerator completely different. The Fuel Economy forum has tons of stuff on hyper miling and how to get great gas mileage.

[broody]

I didn't really read the dyno thing, but what I read is that gearing may affect the WHP, but not the BHP (at the crank). And guess what, for stock cars we always talk about engine/crank HP, not whp. Your argument is still invalid, and even the whp wouldn't change by 5% with such a small change in the gearing.


You need to slow down.



No, the yaris should have longer gears and a better aero. At 85mph, I average 30MPG with my 240hp Toyota MR2 Turbo...

[why?]

No, the yaris should have longer gears and a better aero. At 85mph, I average 30MPG with my 240hp Toyota MR2 Turbo...

And at 85 I can hit 40mpg if i am doing all highway. That is totally beside the point. Stop trying to be a jerk.

[broody]

And at 85 I can hit 40mpg if i am doing all highway. That is totally beside the point. Stop trying to be a jerk.

I think that the Yaris will make better than 29mph at a steady 85mpg, but there is no way you can achieve 40mpg at this speed.
Anyway, the Yaris isn't really a highway cruiser so I don't mind more than that, as long as it's not revving too high for nothing and comfortable.