Subaru XV Crosstrek Forums banner

41 - 60 of 64 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
665 Posts
Discussion Starter #42
It's nice to know that the issue isn't the engines breaking in wrong or something... it's basically purely the speed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
2015 Limited purchased Jan 2016 w/4600 miles from Dealer who claims the mgr drove. Who knows, maybe it was a service loaner. I've only had 4-5 fill ups mixed driving: short freeway commute to work in thr morning but city street on the way home; one or two intertate roadtrip...Average from all that is about 26 mpg. I've burned various octanes and think I'll stick w/87after reading multiple forum comments.

Question - Since I didn't own this vehicle the first 4600 miles, is there anyway to improve mpg?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,537 Posts
^^^Sounds like most of your driving is city/urban. 26 for mostly urban driving sounds about right for this time of year - not too bad for an awd. You can probably expect the mpg to go up 2-4 mpg as the weather warms up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
260 Posts
I have "Bay Area" commuting. I used to cross the San Mateo Bridge, and then up 92 to the top of the hill, 28 miles overall. The rest, pancake flat. I used to average 27.9, but my commute is now a little shorter and I don't have the last 2 mile climb daily, or crossing 101 at 10 mph for 2 miles, so I average 28.8mpg. It's mostly freeway, but here that can mean 6 miles an hour for 20 minutes before you can get to an efficient speed, thankfully I don't have that anymore.

I did a long run a month ago and was getting 33 mpg no problem with cruise control at 65, and modest rolling terrain (880/101 Oakland to Hollister if you want to see terrain on the map).

I find 4 wheeling I get about 12mpg average, depending if it's just dusty, or if we have challenging obstacles.

I find sprint starts don't eat in too much, it's the long freeway crawls at <20mph, or the keeping up with traffic at 75/80 mph, or the tailgating with its encumbent 10-60-10mph every 1/4 mile.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
260 Posts
2015 Limited purchased Jan 2016 w/4600 miles from Dealer who claims the mgr drove. Who knows, maybe it was a service loaner. I've only had 4-5 fill ups mixed driving: short freeway commute to work in thr morning but city street on the way home; one or two intertate roadtrip...Average from all that is about 26 mpg. I've burned various octanes and think I'll stick w/87after reading multiple forum comments.

Question - Since I didn't own this vehicle the first 4600 miles, is there anyway to improve mpg?
Can you shift your work hours to avoid worst case traffic? I know not everyone has flexitime, but on the days when I'm not in traffic I get about 5mpg better performance over a 25 mile mostly freeway commute.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,587 Posts
I have "Bay Area" commuting. I used to cross the San Mateo Bridge, and then up 92 to the top of the hill, 28 miles overall. The rest, pancake flat. I used to average 27.9, but my commute is now a little shorter and I don't have the last 2 mile climb daily, or crossing 101 at 10 mph for 2 miles, so I average 28.8mpg. It's mostly freeway, but here that can mean 6 miles an hour for 20 minutes before you can get to an efficient speed, thankfully I don't have that anymore.

I did a long run a month ago and was getting 33 mpg no problem with cruise control at 65, and modest rolling terrain (880/101 Oakland to Hollister if you want to see terrain on the map).

I find 4 wheeling I get about 12mpg average, depending if it's just dusty, or if we have challenging obstacles.

I find sprint starts don't eat in too much, it's the long freeway crawls at <20mph, or the keeping up with traffic at 75/80 mph, or the tailgating with its encumbent 10-60-10mph every 1/4 mile.
Are these figures by calculating the mileage or what the car says? We're lucky to get 20mpg in LA traffic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
(2019) E10, 38 psi in the tires.
I can get 40-42 over 100+ mile drives on the exaggerometer if we're doing 65 mph on a warm engine and 50F temps using the adaptive cruise control to follow a semi truck with its minimum follow distance. So about 37ish in reality I think.
The crosstrek adaptive cruise control has different settings for how you want it to drive/accelerate. I set it to ECO and am impressed; first cruise control that can do just as well as my right foot (I have gotten it to read in the low 40s on the dash with my right foot too)
The warm-up is pretty harsh mpg - and we have a garage so it's not as bad as it could be. People with short drives will not see high numbers BUT they spend less overall in fuel...

We've gotten 30-33 (Actual) and 35-38 (dash) for average tanks so far with the wife's driving on her mostly highway commute. She is a very normal driver.
I'd suspect that we could get 45 actual mpg if we were at 50 mph on a flat road at 70F (no air conditioning). Air resistance is killer on

I'm thinking about adding a lower air dam as an experiment; have had several cars with much lower ground clearance before that benefited. But the belly pan on the XV is already pretty nice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
260 Posts
Are these figures by calculating the mileage or what the car says? We're lucky to get 20mpg in LA traffic.
That was mostly what the car says, but my commute crawls, never stops. I’ve also got an Automatic plugged in and that is close to the cars numbers, but closer to looking at the milage and refill volume. Worst case would be 25 for traffic.

I’ve driven around LA city freeways at the wrong time, there was a lot of stopped and idling.

Sorry for the late late response
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
328 Posts
Due to the CVT gearing the crosstrek has very bad mpg on start stop driving or upslope driving, so if your route include that dont expect good mpg. If you drive highway on flat road, you can get fantastic mpg.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,587 Posts
That was mostly what the car says, but my commute crawls, never stops. I’ve also got an Automatic plugged in and that is close to the cars numbers, but closer to looking at the milage and refill volume. Worst case would be 25 for traffic.

I’ve driven around LA city freeways at the wrong time, there was a lot of stopped and idling.

Sorry for the late late response
Don't believe what the cars says, LOL. Funny how it always reports that you're getting much better mileage than you really are, never under, always way over...

I've lost interest in tracking it (RP will be happy about that). After a year, and logging every mile and drop of gasoline, I figure I've calibrated it and when it says 23 mpg I know it's actually 19 mpg (our average in LA freeway traffic). The highest I've ever seen on the Exaggerometer was close to 40 (39 point something) on our drive home from the mountains after New Year, using ACC the entire time in light traffic (by LA standards). So, it was probably the 33 mpg highway figure on the window sticker. Ours is totally stock (original tires, nothing on the roof) so I'm wary of the posts claiming 40+ mpg.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
227 Posts
That was mostly what the car says, but my commute crawls, never stops. I’ve also got an Automatic plugged in and that is close to the cars numbers, but closer to looking at the milage and refill volume. Worst case would be 25 for traffic.

I’ve driven around LA city freeways at the wrong time, there was a lot of stopped and idling.

Sorry for the late late response
Don't believe what the cars says, LOL. Funny how it always reports that you're getting much better mileage than you really are, never under, always way over...

I've lost interest in tracking it (RP will be happy about that). After a year, and logging every mile and drop of gasoline, I figure I've calibrated it and when it says 23 mpg I know it's actually 19 mpg (our average in LA freeway traffic). The highest I've ever seen on the Exaggerometer was close to 40 (39 point something) on our drive home from the mountains after New Year, using ACC the entire time in light traffic (by LA standards). So, it was probably the 33 mpg highway figure on the window sticker. Ours is totally stock (original tires, nothing on the roof) so I'm wary of the posts claiming 40+ mpg.
I'm shocked that you would say that about dash displays not being accurate. I mean, 986 miles per gallon in a lifted Jeep Wrangler is easy to get...

...if you reset the mileage at the top of Vail pass and engine brake the whole way down. :p
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,587 Posts
I'm shocked that you would say that about dash displays not being accurate. I mean, 986 miles per gallon in a lifted Jeep Wrangler is easy to get...

...if you reset the mileage at the top of Vail pass and engine brake the whole way down. :p
LOL, maybe you can stall the engine but leave the ignition on and get it over 1,000 mpg... :D

[RP, I said I lost interested in tracking it, not posting about it... :D:D]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,722 Posts
For me it is pretty simple. Short trips = poor gas mileage due to emission regs. Long trips = good mileage, esp if you are away from LA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
227 Posts
LOL, maybe you can stall the engine but leave the ignition on and get it over 1,000 mpg... :D

[RP, I said I lost interested in tracking it, not posting about it... :D:D]
It actually kept going up and rolling over a couple of times. It didn't have enough digits to show it over 1000 so I snapped it when it hit just under that. the pictures with "032.5" or whatever the actual number was didn't look as impressive. :D

Modern fuel injected engines will basically cut the fuel (or at least very close to it) when you're riding a manual transmission gear downhill. As soon as you touch the gas pedal they will start fuelling again. Once I hit the bottom of the grade and had to hit the gas, it dropped down fast.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
227 Posts
For me it is pretty simple. Short trips = poor gas mileage due to emission regs. Long trips = good mileage, esp if you are away from LA.
The biggest difference isn't because of emissions. It's because in-town trips is a lot of stopping and starting. Every time you have to accelerate from a stop you use a lot more gas. Every time you touch the brake, you throw away a lot of the energy that you used (from the fuel) to get your car moving. On the freeway, you just have to maintain speed and that's a much more efficient arrangement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,722 Posts
The biggest difference isn't because of emissions. It's because in-town trips is a lot of stopping and starting. Every time you have to accelerate from a stop you use a lot more gas. Every time you touch the brake, you throw away a lot of the energy that you used (from the fuel) to get your car moving. On the freeway, you just have to maintain speed and that's a much more efficient arrangement.
Yes, but there is also an additional hit because of having to burn more fuel initially to heat up the catalytic converter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
227 Posts
Yes, but there is also an additional hit because of having to burn more fuel initially to heat up the catalytic converter.
That takes about 2-3 minutes from the time you start the engine usually. Starting a cold engine means you're putting more fuel into the mix to get it to run. All that extra fuel (that it really needs with or without a catalytic converter) results in higher emissions of unburned fuel. That hits the cat, causing it to heat up as it reacts to the fuel and remaining oxygen in the exhaust stream. It heats itself up pretty fast that way.

Long before catalytic converters were a thing, carburetors came with a choke for cold starting. The choke would block off airflow into the engine, which caused a higher vacuum in the intake. This higher vacuum draws more fuel in so that the cold engine can stay running. As the engine warms up (slower than the catalytic converter does BTW) you can reduce the choke setting.

A modern fuel injected engine still does essentially the same thing. When the engine is cold it kicks up the idle and adds more fuel. It just doesn't need a choke to force more fuel in. But the major difference is, the fuel injected engine will drop the RPMs down as soon as the engine is warmed up enough. With an old carburetor you had a fast idle cam. When the choke was closed, it would also move the fast idle cam in front of the throttle stop causing the throttle to be held open. As the engine warmed up and the choke backed off, the fast idle cam would hold the throttle open until you kicked the throttle pedal, letting the spring loaded fast idle cam back itself out of the way. So if you started the engine and let it idle for a long time, it would stay at high idle way longer than it needed to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,587 Posts
Yes, but there is also an additional hit because of having to burn more fuel initially to heat up the catalytic converter.
OAK's commute is especially bad because it's stop and go and only 5 miles each way, so the engine has barely had a chance to warm up. The worst for a tankful was 16.9 mpg (no long trips).
 
41 - 60 of 64 Posts
Top