C-MAX Fuel Mileage. What are you getting?

[JacksMax]

Well I have owned my 2013 SE for a little over two months. After about 2 1/2 tanks of gas my dash reads 48.0 AVG MPG.

I drive around 80% suburbs and 20% highway. Don't accelerate too quickly and don't tail gate. Try to keep a reasonable distance between me and car I am following to allow regen braking. The more I drive this car the more I like it.

 

 

[normski]

We have had our c Max just about a month, this pic is from our second fill up. The gallon on the car and the pump was really close, pumped in 11.715 gallons. The more I drive this car the more I enjoy it.

[C-MaxSea]

Is this the place to celebrate ?  Someone's got to do it.  :dance: :dance: :dance:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nick

Edited May 7, 2014 by C-MaxSea

[Generalbeluga]

Driving speed will also effect your MPG's a lot!  Yesterday, I was in a hurry and hit speeds in the mid to high 70s on the FWY with the air-conditioning on (current heat wave in California).  When I turned off the car I saw that I only got about 33 mpg's, the worst ever!.  That was a big hit to my usual 41.5 MPG's but sometimes you gotta get to where you are go'in and can't fart around with all the hyper mileage crap!  I am now in the middle of my second year of ownership and love the car and have learned to just lie back and relax and enjoy the car for all of it's many virtues and not obsess over every little mileage fluctuation!  The CMax is a great car but, it's mileage is very susceptible to environmental changes such as heat, cold, wind and most of all, speed.  Drive like a maniac and your MPG's will suffer, no way to get around it.  Drive like a little old man, and you will get flipped off from time to time but, your mileage will be in the high 40's to low 50's!   It's not rocket science, just common sense.  JMHO on the subject.   

[fbov]

I just posted an update here. My highway commute mileage remains purely temperature dependent, but the back roads are giving me some love; 60+mpg @ 65F for a day and a half... average is more like 55mpg at that temperature, but that's still 13% over my baseline, and an extra 8% above the PCM update. My other changes have not shown a mileaage affect, including snow tires!

 

Granted I've now got a lt more experience, but as I noted in the Best Engine RPM thread, I run a longer, 1.8-bar ICE burn when accelerating than I did before.

 

HAve fun,

Frank

[SnowStorm]

47.0 again! After the winter doldrums, gas mileage in The Enterprise has returned to the "magical" (or infamous!) 47 MPG.  This number is the average since the MPG upgrade last August.  And most of these 22,000 odd miles are "highway" (55 to 70 mph).  Lifetime since new is at 46.9.  "Yes, Virginia," the C-Max does get 47 mpg.

 

[salsaguy]

Uh which driving class did you attend?

The actual rule for SAFE distance behind a car to avoid a rear ended is SIX seconds, which allows for proper braking distance to stop the car in time when going 65mph. Cars average about 125-135 feet to brake. Also need to take into account reaction time.

I do not drive ultra close to draft. When I draft, I drive about 1 second behind the car ahead of me. That is close enough to feel the difference drafting and far enough to have a bit of a safety cusion.

Matt

[salsaguy]

Diesels are best for those drivers who have long commutes on the freeway/highway to get those high mpg numbers.

Hybrids are best for a mix of highway and city drivers.

Electric is best for those with very short commutes around town only to get the highest mpgs

Never understood why some people but the opposite correct car for their primary driving conditions??!! (Electric instead of diesel for long commutes, etc).

 

The much higher cost of diesel gas compared to normal gasoline and the higher initial cost of the TDI Pass at was the reason I got the 2.5L gasoline SEL Premium instead and since in not a road warrior with long commutes and only drive 14 miles to work one way it was the best choice for me. Hope you are enjoying your 2012 Passat.There is another TDI my with same color as mine and it's funny when I park right next to it.

 

Those emission standards in the EU will be equal the US soon. The biggest downsides to diesel in the US is fuel quality and price. Diesel right now is .80+ per gallon more than RUG and you have to get higher mpgs just to break even on the addition expense. On the same driving cycle my C-Max is beating my Passat TDI by 4mpg.

[fbov]

...The actual rule for SAFE distance behind a car to avoid a rear ended is SIX seconds,

I'm decades out of drivers' school, but did a points/insurance reduction course since then, and I think you're using the wrong units. The rule I recall was 1 car length per 10 MPH...

- 65mph is 93.6 feet/second, so in 6 seconds you travel 560 feet.

- 6.5 car lengths @ 15' average is 97.5 feet, or about 1 second.

 

The latter is consistent with safe following distance assuming co-moving objects (i.e. the car in front will take time to stop) and attentive drivers (>1/2 sec reaction time), but I can't see a big aero benefit that far behind...

 

Diesels are best for those drivers who have long commutes on the freeway/highway to get those high mpg numbers.

Hybrids are best for a mix of highway and city drivers.

Electric is best for those with very short commutes around town only to get the highest mpgs...

+1

 

Have fun,

Frank

[plus 3 golfer]

...The actual rule for SAFE distance behind a car to avoid a rear ended is SIX seconds, which allows for proper braking distance to stop the car in time when going 65mph. Cars average about 125-135 feet to brake. Also need to take into account reaction time.

Well, let's see at 75 mph on the AZ freeways that rule means about 8 cars per mile per lane. ;)   I'm not sure there is such a thing as a safe following distance rule. Everyone has an opinion.  I've heard of the one car length for every 10 mph rule which is what I try to follow but in heavy traffic it's likely drivers will be pulling between you and the vehicle in front of you as they jockey for a better position.   

[fbov]

Yep; 1 per 10mph is plenty of room for lane changes to split the gap and in traffic, folks tailgate like mad in traffic (I learned to drive in rush hour traffic.). That's why 6 sec would be a minimum look-ahead distance, better at 12 seconds if you can see that far.

 

Conversely, driving in heavy traffic is like birds flying in a flock, or a school of fish avoiding a shark; groups of animals sometimes move in a manner that seem inpossible without some sort of unseen communication...

 

Have fun,

Frank

[ScubaDadMiami]

I believe that it was found that that 1 per 10 rule was found to be too risky, and that the standard changed to the 2 second rule.

[Adrian_L]

Six seconds?  That would be about half a mile between cars at highway speed!!!

 

All joking aside the safe rule is 2 seconds.  "One steamboat.........two steamboat" 

[DaveofDurham]

Six seconds?  That would be about half a mile between cars at highway speed!!!

 

All joking aside the safe rule is 2 seconds.  "One steamboat.........two steamboat" 

 

Half a mile in six seconds would be 300mph.  That would not be good for your mpg's.

[Generalbeluga]

I do not drive ultra close to draft. When I draft, I drive about 1 second behind the car ahead of me. That is close enough to feel the difference drafting and far enough to have a bit of a safety cusion.

 

Matt

Matt, Matt, Matt, surely you jest!  One second isn't enough time for you to put your cell phone down and pull your finger out of your nose before you are 10 feet through the rear bumper of the car in front of you!  Reaction time alone can be near one second in real life situations where fatigue, inattentiveness, and road conditions are a big factor in stopping distance.  Factor in your age, and that "cold one" you just had at your buddy's house and your cruis'n, big time, for a rear-end collision, it's only a matter of time.  Trust me my friend, it is not worth it!  You should always keep one car length for every 10 MPH you are driving and at 60, that is at least six car lengths.  By not driving safely, you are only giving the rest of us hyper mileager's a bad rep.  Slow down and enjoy the ride.  Forget trying to squeeze every single drop of fuel out of your CMax at the risk of your safety and the safety of those on the road around you!    :rant:

Edited May 23, 2014 by Generalbeluga

[DaveofDurham]

Matt, Matt, Matt, surely you jest!  One second isn't enough time for you to put your cell phone down and pull your finger out of your nose before you are 10 feet through the rear bumper of car in front of you!  Reaction time alone can be near one second in real life situations where fatigue, inattentiveness, and road conditions are a big factor in stopping distance.  Factor in your age, and that "cold one" you just had at your buddy's house and your cruis'n, big time, for a rear-end collision, it's only a matter of time.  Trust me my friend, it is not worth it!  You should always keep one second for every 10 MPH you are driving and at 60, that is at least six car lengths.  By not driving safely, you are only giving the rest of us hyper mileager's a bad rep.  Slow down and enjoy the ride.  Forget trying to squeeze every single drop of fuel out of your CMax at the risk of your safety and the safety of those on the road around you!    :rant:

 

Good to see you back on the forum General B.  60 mph is 88 ft/sec.  So 6 seconds at 60 mph is 528 feet.

[Generalbeluga]

Dave,

Thanks for the correction.  I meant to say one car length for every 10 MPH.  I have corrected my original post.  In any case, Matt is headed for an accident if he really drives that close to the car in front of him.  This is a major cause of accidents and I hate to see it when I am on the freeway.   Having said that, here in So. Cal, it is difficult to leave the proper distance between you and the car in front of you because there is always some impatient assho-- who wants to jump in front of you in his pointless race to the next traffic jam.  

[DaveofDurham]

Dave,

...      Having said that, here in So. Cal, it is difficult to leave the proper distance between you and the car in front of you because there is always some impatient assho-- who wants to jump in front of you in his pointless race to the next traffic jam.  

 

It's a national, perhaps international, problem. 

[ptjones]

Dave,

Thanks for the correction.  I meant to say one car length for every 10 MPH.  I have corrected my original post.  In any case, Matt is headed for an accident if he really drives that close to the car in front of him.  This is a major cause of accidents and I hate to see it when I am on the freeway.   Having said that, here in So. Cal, it is difficult to leave the proper distance between you and the car in front of you because there is always some impatient assho-- who wants to jump in front of you in his pointless race to the next traffic jam.  

In my 35yrs of drafting experience I only draft larger vehicles that can't stop as fast as I can. I stay very aware at what is going on in front and back of me and work on future adjustment plans with current traffic conditions in mind. I drive one  to two semi lengths behind and anymore than that you are losing the draft. I usually don't draft cars because it is unsafe to drive close enough to get much draft unless there is a line of cars. Also they can stop as fast as you can and at six car lengthens there isn't much draft to work with. 

 

Now to add some reality to this discussion, everyone on this forum drafts unsafely if they drive on congested HWY's, if you are paying attention to what is going on in front of you, increasing the gap in front of you as cars keep filling it up, it's the guy on your back bumper you need to worry about. You can't slam on your brakes without him hitting you so you have to apply your brakes moderately so you don't hit the car in front of you and the guy behind you doesn't hit you!

 

Drafting takes full time attention to do it safely and if you can't do that then you shouldn't do it. IMHO :)

 

PS: I drove to San Diego and back, about 5K miles With A/C on most of the time and strong winds and averaged on the Interstates 45mpg. Without the wind and A/C it looks like I can average 47MPG and They said it couldn't be done. LOL :happy feet: :shift:

Paul

[salsaguy]

Yup very true for so cal. And then later you are exactly the same place as them when traffic slows up and eventually you pass them after all. It's been proven that changing lanes frequently is actually slower than staying in the same lane for a long distance. 

Dave,

Thanks for the correction.  I meant to say one car length for every 10 MPH.  I have corrected my original post.  In any case, Matt is headed for an accident if he really drives that close to the car in front of him.  This is a major cause of accidents and I hate to see it when I am on the freeway.   Having said that, here in So. Cal, it is difficult to leave the proper distance between you and the car in front of you because there is always some impatient assho-- who wants to jump in front of you in his pointless race to the next traffic jam.  

[Generalbeluga]

I guess it all comes down to how much hassle and unsafe driving practices you are willing to endure just for that extra one MPG.  If you are close enough to the car ahead of you for it's slip stream to make a difference in your mileage, you are way too close, period!   As Paul points out above, it's not just the car in front of you that you have to worry about.  What about the guy in the rear who's reaction time and breaks are not quite as good as yours? To drive safely and defensively, you have to be "driving" not just your car, but all of the cars around you assuming that the other guy will do the unexpected at any moment.  Safe driving is a skill that must be practiced each and every time you are behind the wheel.  Driving a two ton metal object at freeway speeds is inherently unsafe and practicing hyper-mileage techniques in any driving scenario increases the risk of an accident.  It only takes a fraction of a second for your whole life to change and one has to be immature, crazy or both to risk it all for the sake of some illusive mileage goal.  One MPG, really, REALLY!    I'm sorry for the soap box guys, but this is a real pet peeve for me. :rant2:  I'm frustrated hearing about the benefits of hyper-miling while it's inherent danger is down played or disregarded all together.  Everyone is free to drive as they see fit, so long as the Highway Patrol and the "laws of nature" don't catch up with you!  Just don't do it near me or someone I love while we are out on the road!    :superhero:

[ptjones]

Does anyone know of an instance of someone hypermiling and having an accident? I don't know of any and I sure haven't.  BTW hypermiling is worth 3-20mpg depending how aggressively you do it. It is obviously not for everyone, but it can be fun to improve your mpg's.  IMHO :)

 

Paul

[Noah Harbinger]

PS: I drove to San Diego and back, about 5K miles With A/C on most of the time and strong winds and averaged on the Interstates 45mpg. Without the wind and A/C it looks like I can average 47MPG and They said it couldn't be done. LOL :happy feet: :shift:

 

Is this while drafting behind a semi? I can totally see getting 45MPG if you stick to semi-speeds. 

[David]

I have put on just over 1000 miles on my new C-Max.  The first couple of weeks I got around 37 MPG average.  As the weeks have gone on I have seen this go more from 39 to 43 MPG average.  I reset the average every time I fill which is usually when I get down to about half a tank.  Though it really depends on where I am going and how cold it is and how long a trip.  I have a very short commute to work(6 minutes) and if it is cold it will tend to run on gas almost the whole way, yet if it is warm or if the car was recently used I get into the 40s 50s and even 60s on the MPG.  The highest I have ever gotten on my short trips was 79 MPG though that only happened once so far,  I live in Massachusetts so unfortunately there is very little straightaways, everything is hills.  I suspect the car would do much better in the mid west where things are flat.  Some of my best mileage was while caught in a traffic jam on the Boston Expressway,  an hour trip that got me 59 MPG.  The car was made for that.  As I read in another comment I have also noticed how easily the car goes back to gas on highway speeds over 60 MPH.  I have actually managed to get the electric to kick in over 70 MPH but it seems from about 60 and up it really cannot maintain speed without going back to gas fairly quickly and just the slightest move on the gas pedal kicks it out.  Not that I am condoning speeds over 65MPH, but realistically, yes I live in New England and it happens.  Overall I really like the car and considering my 2002 Taurus only got 18/23 MPG, this is still quite a step up.  I suspect the promised MPG is under more conducive and level conditions but all things considered I think I am doing okay and it does seem to be improving with time and practice.

[Noah Harbinger]

I feel like right around 9000 miles or so is when I saw the biggest increase in fuel economy. 

 

It's probably true that you would get better fuel economy where it is flat than where it is hilly. But the thing is, other cars also get worse fuel economy where it is hilly, and I think the C-Max will perform closer to its rated milage than other cars driving the same route. For example, my friend's Camry gets 15MPG in San Francisco, and I got 32MPG. Our routes are not at all comparable but the type of driving - up-and-down steep hills, constant start and stop, etc - was probably pretty similar. Somewhere flat with long 40MPH stretches without any stopping, yeah I could probably get mid-40s easily, but your average car would probably be doing high 30s. So even though the C-Max would be more fuel efficient on the flats than in a hilly city, it would have a much lower benefit compared to a typical non-hybrid.

Edited May 24, 2014 by Noah Harbinger