Same here @ 5300 miles, 18" Michelin Trails. Stays at 21.2 mpg mostly. 70 MPH on US 93 plus local 35mph roads.I'm at almost 1000 miles, and my best has been 21.2, I'm happy with that. Looking forward to when breakin is done. She's a driving dream.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Same here @ 5300 miles, 18" Michelin Trails. Stays at 21.2 mpg mostly. 70 MPH on US 93 plus local 35mph roads.I'm at almost 1000 miles, and my best has been 21.2, I'm happy with that. Looking forward to when breakin is done. She's a driving dream.
I don’t think any car company is testing their efficiencies at the operating conditions you are using. Your usage is not exactly light and you should not take the EPA number for your efficiency reference.Exactly. Even driving gently and staying 65-75 mph I got about 17.5 mpg with OEM wheels and now with some 35's I am getting 15 mpg. On a recent trip from the Bay Area to Boise going 85-90 mph I got 11.5-12.5 mpg. No idea how this car is rated for or anyone can get north of 20 mpg. I did not buy this for the hybrid engine or efficiency, but it is a pig.
EPA test standards is not new. It has always been there. Whether it is realistic or not is irrelevant. Everybody is following these rules.Well, if 65-75 mph with OEM wheels is not the proper condition then I would say the testing conditions are not realistic and are entirely misleading. The speed limit on most freeways around the Bay Area is 65 mph so it's not like I was doing anything to push the limits, and I was accelerating gently to see how good of mileage I could get. I could not get it north of 17.5 mpg driving slowly and gently. But, again, I do not care one iota about efficiency, just pointing out that the estimates are inaccurate and unrealistic.
No one is getting arrested driving those basic speeds, and for those not in the know Nevada has many portions that have an 80mph speed limit, so 85-90 is the norm for most drivers on such roads and the highway patrol does not care. EPA ratings performed in unrealistic conditions most people don't follow is useless. But, again, I already said I do not care about efficiency and I am not complaining. Just describing reality. I find it interesting anyone can get anywhere near the EPA estimates.EPA test standards is not new. It has always been there. Whether it is realistic or not is irrelevant. Everybody is following these rules.
The fact is that you know you are driving a turbo, Turbo engine has its particular gas consumption profile. Almost all Toyota TNGA platforms is sharing very similar characteristics in efficiency for the past few years. You choose to drive it so far away from its optimal condition (I'd say nobody will ever care optimizing the efficiency at 85-90 or even just 70+ mph, you are lucky you are not arrested at that speed). Then I don't think you should complaint at all about efficiency since you deliberately ignore the rule of physics.
BTW my average at the first 3K miles is 22 MPG, so Toyota's number is absolutely real. If you care efficiency that much then drive it closer to the way EPA mandated the carmakers to test their vehicles is the way to go.
I do, and many others apparently also reported so. I drove on I-5 for 55-70 and I can get 22 + mph. So perhaps the problem is how you drive, not the car.No one is getting arrested driving those basic speeds, and for those not in the know Nevada has many portions that have an 80mph speed limit, so 85-90 is the norm for most drivers on such roads and the highway patrol does not care. EPA ratings performed in unrealistic conditions most people don't follow is useless. But, again, I already said I do not care about efficiency and I am not complaining. Just describing reality. I find it interesting anyone can get anywhere near the EPA estimates.
Or perhaps wind, elevation, elevation profile, weather conditions, traffic, seasonal gas mixture, load, and probably 100 other factors are at play here and it has absolutely nothing to do with anyone driving good/bad.I do, and many others apparently also reported so. I drove on I-5 for 55-70 and I can get 22 + mph. So perhaps the problem is how you drive, not the car.
And many others have reported what I have, that these things consume lots of gas and do not achieve EPA estimated gas mileage. I race cars and motorcycles and have fine throttle control but I cannot get anywhere near the pointless EPA estimates even while deliberately trying to do so. Good to know you are so skilled.
I feel the discussion about the right gas efficiency is kind of silly so this is my last post here. If people want to quote EPA number then establishing reasonable relevance is a pre-requisite. Otherwise it's just an apple-to-orange situation. Each type of engines (gas, diesel, turbo and EV... etc) all have their distinct profiles and characteristics. Some powertrain might be more forgiving and others don't. A fair benchmark is never a naive figure comparison.Or perhaps wind, elevation, elevation profile, weather conditions, traffic, seasonal gas mixture, load, and probably 100 other factors are at play here and it has absolutely nothing to do with anyone driving good/bad.
Nevada and Idaho have 80mph interstates on rolling hills with heavy winds. I can absolutely relate, i get 16-18mpg on the interstate around here at ~80mph. Once you get onto the 2-lane country highways and cruise along at 55-65mph, 20-22+ mpg is back on the menu, depending on overall elevation profile.