Sonata Gas Mileage?

Discussion in 'Hyundai Sonata' started by komobu, Feb 8, 2007.

  1. komobu

    komobu Guest

    I have a 2006 Sonata with a 3.3 v6 engine. I only get 17mpg when
    driving around town. I drive pretty conservatively and there is only
    15k on it so I am rather surprised that I am not getting 22 or 23 mpg.
    Please let me know what kind of mileage you get with an 06 or 07
    Sonata so I can tell if it is just my car or if they all are bad on
    gas.

    Thanks
    Pat
     
    komobu, Feb 8, 2007
    #1
  2. I think you are doing OK around town. I drive a mix of highway, steady back
    road, fairly easy city (small town?)driving. I get about 23 on average, 25
    to 26 on straight highway. EPS rating is 20 and no one ever gets the EPS
    rating so expecting 23 is out of the question, IMO. Ratings are being
    revised to be more realistic starting, I think, in 2008.
     
    Edwin Pawlowski, Feb 8, 2007
    #2
  3. komobu

    Dust Guest

    I get about 19-20 mpg with the 4 cylinders local road, suburb style city.
     
    Dust, Feb 8, 2007
    #3
  4. komobu

    Matt Whiting Guest

    Isn't the city rating 20 for your car? And given that the EPA ratings
    are typically optimistic, I'd say 17 in town is unusually low,
    especially if you live in a climate that is cold this time of year. I
    have a four cylinder Sonata and I get only 26-29 in the winter driving
    mostly on the highway commuting to work. I doubt I'd get more than 20
    in the city and my car has a 24 MPG city rating nad 34 highway. I've
    never got about 32 even on the highway.

    I don't think Hyundai can match GM and Toyota for mileage, but I'm not
    sure they are the worst out there either. Although, one test I saw on
    the Sonata vs. a Camry, Accord and I think a GM car had the Sonata as
    the worst of the bunch.

    Matt
     
    Matt Whiting, Feb 8, 2007
    #4
  5. komobu

    gerry Guest

    [original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
    EPA figures are also based on using gasoline. In many areas of the
    country, "gas" is 10% ethanol. Ethanol has noticeably less energy per
    gallon than pure gasoline.

    The math seems to suggest only 3% or so less mpg. Subjectively (my
    experience when driving between areas that had 10% ethanol vs pure
    gasoline appear to have more than 3% mpg loss. Since the areas were not
    identical, it's impossible for me to me to be sure.

    Anybody have real test data of performance of different engines with
    different fuel blends?

    gerry
     
    gerry, Feb 9, 2007
    #5
  6. komobu

    Matt Whiting Guest

    I meant to say "not unusually low" above. Sorry for the typo.

    Matt
     
    Matt Whiting, Feb 9, 2007
    #6
  7. komobu

    Tom Guest

    Another person opted for a V6 under the misconception that he needed more
    'power'. :eek:) The 4 has more than enough power to move my '06 briskly in
    passing mode. I have been consistently getting 24.6 +- around town with an
    occasional 15 mile highway trip to the next town. People, you don't need a
    V6!!!!! Stop wasting gas! Sure you can afford to buy it but why?????

    I'll get off my soapbox now. I love my Sonata and will buy another. I wish
    they had a pickup truck, diesel, or hybrid, however.

    Tom
     
    Tom, Feb 9, 2007
    #7
  8. Well, for a couple of reasons. First of all, the Limited (which I have)
    only comes with the V6. I wanted all the goodies and I'm willing to pay for
    it.

    Second, yes, the four is adequate, but I wanted more than just adequate.
    Sometimes I just like to accelerate fast, not just adequately.

    It may depress you further to know that I have and use my remote starter.
    Yes, on the really cold mornings, or after work, my car is just sitting
    there burning gas, getting warmed up so my pretty tush does not have to get
    onto a cold leather seat. I set the heated seat on when I park the car so
    it will warm my buns when I get in.

    I want to thank all of you that eat at Burger King and McDonalds for eating
    all those burgers and making leather for my seats readily available and
    reasonably priced. If all you ate was tofu, I'd be sitting on mohair seat
    covers.
     
    Edwin Pawlowski, Feb 9, 2007
    #8
  9. komobu

    Mike Marlow Guest

    Many of us test drove 4 cylinders with automatics and found the performance
    to be less than remarkable. Quite poor, in fact. Therefore, we own six
    cylinders. I'm glad you like your 4, but please don't suggest that because
    a 4 is brisk enough for you, that it should satisfy the needs of everyone.
     
    Mike Marlow, Feb 9, 2007
    #9
  10. komobu

    Matt Whiting Guest

    Then you need a Corvette or a Viper. Even a V-6 Sonata doesn't
    accelerate even close to fast.

    Matt
     
    Matt Whiting, Feb 9, 2007
    #10
  11. I had a Mitsubishi 3000 for a while. Life is full of compromises and it was
    not a practical every day driver. Right now, the Sonata is as fast as I'm
    going to get.
     
    Edwin Pawlowski, Feb 9, 2007
    #11
  12. komobu

    Vineeth Guest

    Very true indeed Mike! i test drove a few 4 cylinders b4 giving in &
    going for what I felt was "adequate" power and picking up the V6.
    Yeah in response to the OP I feel an average of 17 is pretty good. I
    have a mix of highway(30%) & city driving & get an average of 17. I
    once did get 32 on the highway only driving through Virginia ( not
    faster than 55mph)
     
    Vineeth, Feb 9, 2007
    #12
  13. Where do you live? I am in the Midwest, and it has been bitterly cold here.
    In Winter, the gas mileage in all my cars suffers pretty significantly, and
    when it is cold, it always will. But they all come up in Summer nicely.

    There have been some other long threads about Sonata fuel mileage in the
    past. Archive and read those - they are interesting.

    Tom Wenndt
     
    Rev. Tom Wenndt, Feb 9, 2007
    #13
  14. komobu

    Eric G. Guest

    You guys must be pretty hard on the pedal. I tend to "open 'er up" a
    bit nowadays too, but I am still getting about 22 MPG with 19,000 on the
    odometer. Although with the cold here the last week, I only managed
    about 19.5 MPG on my last tank.

    Eric
     
    Eric G., Feb 9, 2007
    #14
  15. komobu

    Tom Guest

    I got that yearning for power out of my system years ago with my Porsches,
    390 Cougar GT's and 69 427 vette! Sold them for a song when gas prices went
    up and the wife bitched about repair costs. Now I see them on Barrett
    Jackson and just cry!!! :eek:) There really is very little difference between
    the 4 and 6, like Matt said. I guess you need that extra torque to pull all
    that extra stuff you bought to feel good. :eek:) For me, with the drives on
    the roads today, I don't care to stay out there any longer than I have
    to.......

    Tom
     
    Tom, Feb 9, 2007
    #15
  16. komobu

    Tom Guest

    Mike,

    I only stated what I feel. What you feel is your business. I know that I
    can pass safely on a two lane road, accelerate at a good rate when needed,
    and move up and down hills without a struggle. I have 15,000 miles on my
    car and see no reason for needing more power. Your opinion is respected
    just as well as mine. Different strokes for different folks.

    Tom
     
    Tom, Feb 9, 2007
    #16
  17. komobu

    Eric G. Guest

    Without the benefit of anyone running a real scientific test between the
    two configurations (really 3 if you count the MT), I respectfully disagree
    with both of you. There is a medium to large difference between the 4 and
    the 6. I be willing to bet that in the real world, we are talking about a
    1.5-2 second difference in the 0-60 time, and significantly more as speeds
    get higher.

    I know that neither of you feel the need for that extra power, and that is
    certainly your perrogative, but IMHO you are really talking apples and
    oranges by comparing the 4 to the 6.

    Eric
     
    Eric G., Feb 9, 2007
    #17
  18. komobu

    Tom Guest

    164 vs 234 hp, of course, makes a difference, but a 4 cyl with 164 hp giving
    26 mpg is VERY respectable! Like I said earlier, I know what a 427 cubic
    inch vette or even a 429 Shelby Mustang feels like - unforgettable- but
    today it no longer seems so important whether I get to 60 mph 1.5 seconds
    later than you. We'll both be either stuck at the next light or behind a
    line of brainless, foreign truckers side by side going up the hill at 50
    mph. I'd love a 6 too, but I had to ask myself why I needed it. I didn't
    really have a good answer so I went for the more fuel efficient, cheaper 4
    with 164 hp.

    It's a no win conversation, of course, but always fun to debate.

    Thanks,

    tom
     
    Tom, Feb 10, 2007
    #18
  19. komobu

    Matt Whiting Guest

    Well, the data doesn't support your bet. The difference is slightly
    more than 1 second in 0-60 between my 4 cylinder and your V-6 (1.19 to
    be exact) and the difference in the quarter mile time is even less which
    suggests the difference narrows with higher speed rather than widens as
    you suggest. The quarter mile difference is only 1.06 seconds. So
    we're talking less than 150 feet difference at the end of a quarter
    mile. This is hardly an earthshattering difference and I'll bet that
    most of it is off the line. The throttle and clutch on the Sonata are
    terrible and making a quick launch is nearly impossible. I'll bet that
    a 5 MPH rolling start would make the times very nearly identical, but I
    can't find any data to prove that conclusively. However, I think it can
    be reasonably inferred from the fact that the gap between the quarter
    mile times is even less than that of the 0-60. The main reason for this
    difference is the time lost on the launch. The average acceleration is
    even higher for the 4 cylinder between 60 MPH and the quarter mile point
    since the time gap was actually narrowed during this period.

    http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Spec_Glance.aspx?year=2006&make=Hyundai&model=Sonata&trimid=-1

    Well, it doesn't really matter, but I don't think the data supports
    this. From an acceleration perspective, my manual I-4 is nearly
    identical to your automatic V-6 once we get rolling. I won't argue that
    the V-6 is faster off the line, but if the Sonata had a decent throttle
    and clutch, even that advantage would pretty much disapper and I'll bet
    the 0-60 times would be within the error bands of being identical.

    Matt
     
    Matt Whiting, Feb 10, 2007
    #19
  20. komobu

    Matt Whiting Guest

    I agree that the debate is fun. However, it isn't HP that matters with
    respect to acceleration, but rather torque peak and the shape of the
    torque curve. The V-6 still has a large advantage here, but not as
    great. The HP ratio is 1.45 (235/162) and the torque ratio is 1.38
    (226/164). However, even more telling is that the torque peak for the 6
    occurs at substantially lower RPM (3500 vs. 4250). Given that the
    redlines are nearly identical (5800 for the 4 vs. 6000 for the 6), this
    means that the 4 will continue to increase acceleration for a greater
    portion of the RPM range. The 6 will begin to fall off above 3500
    whereas the 4 still has 750 RPM to go before it begins to taper off.
    Add in the losses in the automatic vs. the manual and the extra 200 or
    so lbs of weight for the V-6, and you can see where the difference in
    acceleration is much less than folks might expect from a superficial
    look. I drove two or three V-6 automatics before buying my I-4 manual
    as I was trying to see if they all had the touchy throttle, and the full
    throttle acceleration was simply not distinguishable without a stopwatch
    once the clutch was fully engaged and the cars rolling. I tried several
    low speed runs and a couple of 50-75 MPH passing runs and the four felt
    as strong as the six up to the speeds I tried (I don't think I exceeded
    75 maybe 80 at the most). Maybe there would be a difference if you
    started at 100 MPH and did a roll-on test, but I don't drive that fast
    on public roads so I don't know.

    Matt
     
    Matt Whiting, Feb 10, 2007
    #20
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.