2009 GT and 2.4 Base Owners - Question 4 U - Re: Gas Mileage

[scooter]

Just curious what kind of mileage people are getting with the new 2.4 in the base and GT. Specify what percentage you drive highway vs. city, and what kind of mileage you have been getting so far. Thanks!

[Eloi]

I'll be happy to let you know when I'll get my Vibe 2009, at the end of April (or a bit sooner if I'm lucky).

[Theodoreable]

Quote, originally posted by scooter »Just curious what kind of mileage people are getting with the new 2.4 in the base and GT. Specify what percentage you drive highway vs. city, and what kind of mileage you have been getting so far. Thanks!We have a 2009 GT automatic with less than 500 miles on it. We have only filled the tank a couple of times. So far, we have been getting about 25mph, almost solely on back roads but in traffic.

[traveler03]

I just did my second tank fill also and the fuel was 25 mpg. I drive 24 mile to work one way about half at 60 mph and half at 40-50 mph and always with traffic. This is much better than my Envoy which was around 16-17 mpg for this same travel.

[traveler03]

Sorry, I forgot to add that my Vibe is a 09 AWD automatic.

[ajflan]

To be honest, I was suprised by how low the epa estimates are for the gas milage of the 09's. I would assume that most people interested in buying a Vibe are interested because they are looking to get good gas milage. I was at the dealer and saw that the sticker for the 2.4 said 21 mpg city. I thought that was pretty bad for a non performance four banger.

[bull77]

Quote, originally posted by ajflan »To be honest, I was suprised by how low the epa estimates are for the gas milage of the 09's. I would assume that most people interested in buying a Vibe are interested because they are looking to get good gas milage. I was at the dealer and saw that the sticker for the 2.4 said 21 mpg city. I thought that was pretty bad for a non performance four banger.agreed, also disappointing that the 1.8 has worse mileage than the previous version

[Fatty Lumpkin]

On a related note, I emailed the people at the fueleconomy.gov website because the 09 data is not listed on their site. I got the following reply:[BEGIN QUOTE]Dear Mr _______: EPA will release the first installment of fuel economy data in May of 2009 (ed- I think she meant 2008). We will update our web site as soon as the data are available. Manufacturers are required to test the fuel economy of vehicles following a specific testing procedure and submit the results to EPA for confirmation. (EPA retests 10-15% of the vehicles each year). Federal regulations require all new cars to have a window sticker which includes the EPA MPG rating so if they vehicles are available for sale, the MPG should be available on the window sticker. I believe Toyota has the MPG estimates for these 2009 models available on their web site. While the numbers are Toyota's web site are not "official", only rarely would EPA's estimates differ from the manufacturers. Sorry we don't have the information you are seeking. http://www.fueleconomy.gov[END QUOTE]That being said, I'm really hoping the 2.4 gets much better city mileage than the 21 that's been claimed. I would really like to get the GT but really don't like the idea of getting 21 MPG in an economy car.

[scooter]

Quote, originally posted by Fatty Lumpkin »On a related note, I emailed the people at the fueleconomy.gov website because the 09 data is not listed on their site. I got the following reply:[BEGIN QUOTE]Dear Mr _______: EPA will release the first installment of fuel economy data in May of 2009 (ed- I think she meant 2008). We will update our web site as soon as the data are available. Manufacturers are required to test the fuel economy of vehicles following a specific testing procedure and submit the results to EPA for confirmation. (EPA retests 10-15% of the vehicles each year). Federal regulations require all new cars to have a window sticker which includes the EPA MPG rating so if they vehicles are available for sale, the MPG should be available on the window sticker. I believe Toyota has the MPG estimates for these 2009 models available on their web site. While the numbers are Toyota's web site are not "official", only rarely would EPA's estimates differ from the manufacturers. Sorry we don't have the information you are seeking. http://www.fueleconomy.gov[END QUOTE]That being said, I'm really hoping the 2.4 gets much better city mileage than the 21 that's been claimed. I would really like to get the GT but really don't like the idea of getting 21 MPG in an economy car. That's exactly where I sit too. I like everything about the GT, but the city mileage has me a little put off.

[scooter]

Quote, originally posted by bull77 »agreed, also disappointing that the 1.8 has worse mileage than the previous versionRemember, though, these values are supposed to be based on the new testing methodology, which is supposed to be more realistic... So in the past the window sticker values were inflated... I know I don't get anywhere near what the sticker said for my 03.

[keithvibe]

Quote, originally posted by scooter » know I don't get anywhere near what the sticker said for my 03. i do though for my 06awd... 26-27 city.. and 32-33hyw

[dtana117]

Quote, originally posted by scooter »Just curious what kind of mileage people are getting with the new 2.4 in the base and GT. Specify what percentage you drive highway vs. city, and what kind of mileage you have been getting so far. Thanks!225 miles to about 10 gallons. That is all city and not driving it to get great mpg's. It also is its first 225 miles. We shall see what it gets when it breaks in. I also put premium in this time to see what happens.BTW, people look at the gas mileage stickers and do not look at the average they put in between the two numbers. The 2.4L rates better than the old 1.8L in the previous generation. I am fully confident I cant get close to 30 in my 2.4L without trying.

[zdaliah]

Yup, i have had my '09 for over a month, and if there was one negative I could say about the car is that the gas mileage is not as good as i expected it to be.I don't have any numbers, and haven't done any serious calculations, but just by eyeing the fuel gauge, and comparing it with my Rogue, it seems to be less than what i would expect from a 1.8L engine.Otherwise, its great

[kowell]

I get a very deceiving 18mpg on my 2009 2.4L base model with automatic transmission in mostly city driving. Of course, the engine is only 800km old and I'm still getting used to driving this car. Every once in a while without thinking I stamp down on the gas like I was used to doing on my old V6 maxima. I'm confident that the numbers will get much better in time (as will I).

[SagWhite]

The 09 with 2,4L is estimated 21 MPG city driving (don't know if it's automatic or manual transmission). You are close to the EPA ratings, and you are still breaking in your engine.And I just saw you are living in Quebec, so it's still "winter" and we still have this crappy winter fuel, so I'm pretty sure you will get better number during summer.

[scooter]

Close to the ratings yes, but anything less that 20 makes me cringe...

[kevera]

I don't have an 09,but I drove one for the catch the Vibe contest.We did 200 kms on a quarter tank of gas with spirited driving on both highway and city driving.So that would be 800kms a tank,not sure what that would be converted to miles though.Did not seem so bad compared to my 04.

[kowell]

You did 200km on 12.5L of gas wich gives you an estimate 6.25L/100 km or 37.63 mpg wich is VERY good considering you had the 2.4L. So far I average almost double that on mixt city-highway driving with an automatic 2.4L FWD.Was the car automatic or manual?

[VivaVibe]

Quote, originally posted by scooter »Remember, though, these values are supposed to be based on the new testing methodology, which is supposed to be more realistic... So in the past the window sticker values were inflated... I know I don't get anywhere near what the sticker said for my 03.For me, I find the old numbers are more accurate. I actually get slightly better than the old EPA numbers. It was rated at 29/34 and I consistently get 30/36. I guess I'm an unrealistic driver.

[Eloi]

Regarding this 200 km/ a quarter of the tank, I was wondering, is the fuel gauge accurate on the Vibe? I mean, on my Pontiac Sunfire 1996, I average around 700 km/tank. But when I'm at 500 km, the gauge says that there is still half of the tank left. So, the gauge is not good cause I drive 500 km for the 1st half and only 200 km with the last half.I hope it makes sense...

[Petrucci914]

Quote, originally posted by Eloi »Regarding this 200 km/ a quarter of the tank, I was wondering, is the fuel gauge accurate on the Vibe? I mean, on my Pontiac Sunfire 1996, I average around 700 km/tank. But when I'm at 500 km, the gauge says that there is still half of the tank left. So, the gauge is not good cause I drive 500 km for the 1st half and only 200 km with the last half.I hope it makes sense...Well, you're dealing with different tank sizes as well. And I think a lot of gauges today are calibrated in a way such that there is more gas avilable in the last 1/4 than the higher quarters.......so that when you're close to an empty tank you really have more gas than you'd think. Hope that makes sense.

[Booker]

Any 2.4 owners have an update on mileage? I am seriously considering the 09 Vibe but am leaning toward the 1.8 because of the mileage numbers on the 2.4.Thx

[northvibe]

2.4 mileage should be semi similar to the tC or the camery with the 2.4. there will be a break in period AND keeping under 3k rpms will also help. Just because its a 4 banger doesnt mean it will be high mileage, its also how you drive it If you really want the mileage I think the 1.8 is the one to get. My 04 1.8l auto got 35hwy and 25-28 city depending on my driving.