[KillerInsideMe]

I just put 1000 miles on my 2010 2.5x from Florida to NC.
3 hours of that drive were on the flat I95 from Florida to SC.
I couldn't avg greater than 23.5 mpg at 80mph.
At 75mph, I avg 24.5.

Car is bone stock. Air pressures were checked prior to trip.

I'm curious, and think I know the answer now, just how realistic 27mpg is going to be in this car on the hwy.

Any slower than 75 and you start just becoming an obstacle on the road.

 

[KillerInsideMe]

I guess I posted in the wrong area, just noticed the fuel economy forum...DOH

 

[Cuddles]

Weird. Are you looking at the overall MPG of the car? Or the trip? I think you get three options with the MPG. Odometer reading, trip A and trip B. I've managed around 31.XX on the highway with my 09 2.5x (5 speed). I'd say I was going about 72 mph or so.

I know people talk about break ins and what not, but at 1000 miles on the car, a big long trip (without fluctuating speed) is bad. From what I gather. However, I also don't think break ins matter too much.

 

[YoGeorge]

I just put 1000 miles on my 2010 2.5x from Florida to NC.
3 hours of that drive were on the flat I95 from Florida to SC.
I couldn't avg greater than 23.5 mpg at 80mph.
At 75mph, I avg 24.5.

Car is bone stock. Air pressures were checked prior to trip.

I'm curious, and think I know the answer now, just how realistic 27mpg is going to be in this car on the hwy.

Any slower than 75 and you start just becoming an obstacle on the road.

Note that the EPA ratings for the Foz are 20 city and 26 highway.

Why would you expect mileage better than that? Especially at high speeds over 70?

I've got an '09 FX and your mileage sounds pretty similar to mine...high speeds kill the mileage. If you drive 45-50 in overdrive, you will average 33 mpg. As you speed up from there, mileage falls off. I think I can get 27ish going about 70 mph, and about 24-25 at 75-80. Note that winter blend gasoline with ethanol does notably decrease mileage.

I would increase tire pressures over the factory recommendations, maybe 36 front/34-35 rear. This seems to make a bit of diff for me.

Cuddles--either you are not telling the truth or driving downhill, based on my observations....or maybe you have gasoline that is not laced with ethanol. 31 mpg at over 70 mph seems completely impossible to me.

George

 

[guroove]

Drive 65 mph, avoid using the brakes and don't flat foot accelerate. If you do this, you should get EPA highway MPG or better. If it's worse, then it might be something wrong with your car.

 

[KillerInsideMe]

George...My window sticker says 27 not 26...
I did increase tire pressures a bit, but not quite that much. I understand the point though.

And guroove, who drives 65 on the highway..
Speed limit for the majority of my trip was 70 and even 75 is holding up traffic most of the time.

I get that driving over 70 will decrease mileage, but when my 06 Pathfinder could get its EPA 21mpg on the highway at 80, I'd like to think my 4cly would do better.
BUT......I see a power to weight issue with the 170hp Forester compared to the 265hp PF.

Anyway..... I think hp and aerodynamics are the big factors the more I read on the forum.

Thanks for the input guys.......

 

[KillerInsideMe]

Weird. Are you looking at the overall MPG of the car? Or the trip?

All of the above..

I was experimenting. I left trip A set throughout the entire trip and experimented with different speeds using trip B.

90% of the trip was open highway. My final avg was just over 23.

One think i find interesting is one lady at the dealership said her 2.5 Outback with CVT got over 30mpg on the highway. Is it really that much more aero or is it the CVT helping that much?

 

[guroove]

I've seen a hair shy of 26 mpg in my '05 XT. That was 100% highway, and I didn't go over the speed limit or touch the brakes the whole time. I'm not sure what the EPA highway rating is for my car, but I'm sure I beat it by a few. It does seem odd to not be able to reach it.

 

[YoGeorge]

George...My window sticker says 27 not 26...
I did increase tire pressures a bit, but not quite that much. I understand the point though.

And guroove, who drives 65 on the highway..
Speed limit for the majority of my trip was 70 and even 75 is holding up traffic most of the time.

I get that driving over 70 will decrease mileage, but when my 06 Pathfinder could get its EPA 21mpg on the highway at 80, I'd like to think my 4cly would do better.
BUT......I see a power to weight issue with the 170hp Forester compared to the 265hp PF.

Anyway..... I think hp and aerodynamics are the big factors the more I read on the forum.

Thanks for the input guys.......

Hi Killer:

My Foz is an '09 and both the MT and AT were rated 20/26--it appears they got an extra EPA mpg out of the '10 version--I did not know this.

I have a full size Ford van with 3-4x the cubic footage of the Foz inside and the frontal area of a barn and that can get 17 mpg on the freeway at 75. In comparison, I would like better mileage out of the Foz but enjoy it enough that it's not a major compromise. And like you, I am NOT able to drive 65 mph; my time has value as well, and I do not like to be the slowest car on the road. When traveling, I usually have a deadline, or at least a desire to not spend more time on the road than I have to.

Surprised that you did that well with the Pathfinder (was that 2WD maybe?). I've got friends with Xterras that get 17 mpg on the road...

It does look like the CVT delivers some good mileage, and I'm guessing the Outback may be a bit more aero. I am often skeptical of individual reports that seem unrealistic. I think my trip B is reporting 24.6 mpg for my last 8000 miles, and I will note that I have 215/70x16" tires on my Foz, so my mileage is understated by about 3%.

George

 

[KillerInsideMe]

George.....
I also enjoy the Foz and am not necessarily "complaining" but rather questioning.

It might be fun to use this as an excuse to experiment with some custom mods

And yes, the Pathfinder was 2wd.

 

[abacall]

The absolute best economy I got with the Forester was going 50 mph. Sure, it's absolutely impossible to drive that speed on open highway. However, with my 300+ hp Forester I returned 29 mpg average over 14 gallons.
Driving 65 mph diminishes it to 25 mpg, 75 mph comes down to 23 mpg.

There are some mods you can do to theoretically increase economy. Front and rear tire "splitters," front chin spoiler, lower stance, skinnier tires with less rolling resistance and higher pressures, lighter rotational mass in wheels, tires, rotors, and drivetrain components, lighter chassis, remove roof cross bars, make the bottom of the flat using lightweight plastics.
The idea is to get light and get slippery.

 

[thedude]

If you want to get EPA fuel economy, you have to drive the way they do:
Fuel Economy Test Schedules

Long stretches at 80mph will have a big impact on fuel economy.
Consumer Reports Cars Blog: Tested: Speed vs fuel economy
Wind resistance is a drag!

 

[YoGeorge]

George.....
I also enjoy the Foz and am not necessarily "complaining" but rather questioning.

It might be fun to use this as an excuse to experiment with some custom mods

And yes, the Pathfinder was 2wd.

I didn't really think you were complaining. I kept hoping for better mpg with my Foz, but at 28k miles, it's broken in and it's getting what it's gonna get. I have been running synthetic oil (Valvoline Synpower) since 11k miles and that has not made a diff. It is my understanding that synthetic differential lube might help a bit and may switch my rear diff over to that at 30k miles. I'd switch the front transaxle as well, but am nervous about syncro action.

I've also been in a discussion on the metal shield protecting the AT cooler lines (although I have a stick) and am a bit inspired to maybe think about either a plastic cover or skid plate under the engine--which will have to clean up the aerodynamics a bit.

There was a guy on a Ford truck forum who was working to get 30 mpg out of an Explorer on the freeway, and I think he did it--but this involved heavy air dams and other aerodynamic mods, as well as engine mods, recalibration of ECU, etc. There comes a point where the mods cost you more than the mileage gain saves you, but I might also give a shot to some minor modifications.

One think I note is that my '09 tends to sit a bit high in the front and I would guess that lowering the front end an inch or so might help with the underbody air flow a bit.

In the end, Foresters get the mileage they get, which is a helluva lot better than many other AWD sport utes (Jeep Liberty, Explorer, etc) and at least as good as most anything with the same interior room and AWD.

George

 

[KillerInsideMe]

I'm actually somewhat surprised to see NO underbody tray under the engine.
Now..I'm wondering how to fab one in the garage.

If for no other reason, I'd want one to keep the road debris out of the engine bay as much as possible.

I wont sink too much into this, because of the reasons you stated.
It ends up being the same logic as "I'm going to buy a $5k motorcycle because it gets 50mpg"

 

[ArcadeTom]

There was a guy on a Ford truck forum who was working to get 30 mpg out of an Explorer on the freeway, and I think he did it--but this involved heavy air dams and other aerodynamic mods, as well as engine mods, recalibration of ECU, etc. There comes a point where the mods cost you more than the mileage gain saves you, but I might also give a shot to some minor modifications.
George

Hey George, Are you also on ford-trucks.com? I have the same screen name there as well with an album of my '74 F-100 Explorer

 

[abacall]

I'm actually somewhat surprised to see NO underbody tray under the engine.

:icon_question: There should be one.

 

[AlleyCat]

This vehicle has poor aerodynamics and large frontal area and a VTEC system that prob kicks in the extra high profile cam lobe at high speed highway - I also noticed that over 75 MPH I cant get over 26MPG. it will get over thirty at 50 MPH. A larger circumference tyre with a speedo recal might fix this. I dont know how much larger you can go; 205 75 16?

 

[KillerInsideMe]

:icon_question: There should be one.

There is a small cover on the far right and far left, but the center, under the header is completely exposed.

 

[Realalefan]

In my 09 non-turbo I managed once to get 34.9 mpg over a 90-minute all-highway trip doing the speed limit - 55 mph. Reset the mileage gauge after the engine was warm as I entered the highway, just me in the car, summertime but no A/C, no headwind at all, coastal trip so relatively flat. Haven't duplicated it since, but here are my general observations:

55 mph - 33-34 mpg
60 mph - 31-32 mpg
65 mph - 29-30 mpg
70 mph - 27-28 mpg

Obviously there can be considerable variation depending on conditions. And once you start driving on local roads the mileage drops like a rock.

Actually, the most surprising thing I've found while playing with MPH is how many people drive the speed limit - far more than I would have expected, the majority in fact. I never really noticed driving my usual speed, 8-9 MPH over the limit. Slowing down and taking a look around was illuminating.

 

[YoGeorge]

Hey George, Are you also on ford-trucks.com? I have the same screen name there as well with an album of my '74 F-100 Explorer

Yup, as YoGeorge....I have an '02 E150 but my first truck was a '78 F100 (Ranger trim) short bed flareside with a 300 inch six and 4 speed manual O/D, bought new in 1978... That one got 22 mpg on the road in the days of 55 mph speed limits...

I'll have to check out your truck--I love those "dentside" Fords.

George