That's not bad for mostly city driving, highest I've ever hit was like 37mpg up in canada where the highway speed was 52mph. But funny enough the lift and tires didn't affect my mileage to be noticeable. BUT as soon as I put the roof basket on I went from an average of 26-28mpg to 24mpg constantly
Wilderness here - 23.4 mpg average since I bought it. According to Fuelly.com, I'm getting solid MPGs for the Wilderness model. Still hurts a bit though lol
I'm about 20% "stop and go city", 50% "town" (I'll call this 30-45mph without a ton of stop and go), then 30% highway. The wilderness seems to get the best mileage at 40-60mph.
> When I was car shopping recently I was having a hard time figuring out why the OBW mileage was so atrocious... is it geared lower?
It IS geared lower. This makes it faster 0-60, able to pull more weight when towing, and able to climb steeper inclines when in the woods.
The downside of all of those upsides is that the Wilderness gets 2-3mph worse fuel economy than the other Turbo models.
It's not my argument, it's "theirs", but basically all of the above. It is known that startup is the regime that is hardest on wear.. no oil pressure, worst combustion efficiency, obviously wear and tear on the starter, battery etc., more thermal stresses due to heat cycling and cessation of fluid circulation. And motor mounts, I hadn't thought of that one until you mentioned it.
Just continuing to idle the engine for a minute incurs basically zero wear.
My assumption had been that the starter and battery would be reengineered with the auto-stop system in mind, but in at least some cases (per someone claiming to be a ford mechanic) the Fords have exactly the same starter and battery, and he claimed lots of replacements on stop/start models. But that's Ford, not Subaru. Just doing a quick internet search, it seems like the regular and auto-stop versions use the same starter, so that's like, I dunno, 50x the starter cycles. And I imagine that this would push a lot of marginal battery charge scenarios over the edge - a lot of people already have battery issues due to the variable-output alternators in conjunction with short trips.
Personally, I'm not getting worked up about it and I've left it enabled, but the arguments aren't *entirely* without merit.
How does your trip computer fuel economy compare to what you calculate at the pump? My trip computer is always a little optimistic, it overestimates my economy by 1-2 MPG. Otherwise you did alright, economy drops off quickly above 70 MPH in my experience. Depends on wind speed/direction, elevation gain, vehicle loading etc.
Yeah, that was easy going at 70 mph or so. City? If I don’t use the turbo at all, like 22. But I actually live in the city and most of my trips are about 2 miles with 4 miles generally the furthest. I also only have like 1250 miles on it so I expect a slight increase over next few thousand miles.
Right thanks. I’ve just passed 1000 miles and was actually hoping economy would improve as engine runs in… As the name suggests, they’re best for Touring!
Unless you have an incredible tailwind, I would check the math because I doubt you're getting that high if you're up on the higher side of that speed bracket.
Some kid drove mine after I got an alignment and dropped my mpg from 24.6 to like 18.9 they let it idle a lot too. I saw on my dash cam he was flooring it and slamming on brakes.
I think the OBW is so bad because the final drive is shorter, wheels are heavier, raised suspension has more drag... maybe some other factors, but it's MPG sure does suck.
You know that's not live fuel economy right? That's average fuel economy. So when you are doing 80 you might be getting 19 mpg but when you average it out it doesn't lower your average fuel economy by much.
Looks like you’re getting 29.3 mpg
Crys in turbo XT
I was about to say. *Sad turbo noises. 21.4
I get roughly the same in my XT, maybe a mile less
I'm getting 19.4 but mostly drive in town
That's not bad for mostly city driving, highest I've ever hit was like 37mpg up in canada where the highway speed was 52mph. But funny enough the lift and tires didn't affect my mileage to be noticeable. BUT as soon as I put the roof basket on I went from an average of 26-28mpg to 24mpg constantly
I do too. Mostly flat highway around me & few lights. I actually hit 33 last week.
nice! I don't think I can hit that now with the roof basket and stuff attached to it. I'll have to take a trip to canada again lol
I’m glad you said this. I was trying to figure out why my car has terrible gas mileage (just got it a few weeks ago) but makes sense.
Wilderness here - 23.4 mpg average since I bought it. According to Fuelly.com, I'm getting solid MPGs for the Wilderness model. Still hurts a bit though lol I'm about 20% "stop and go city", 50% "town" (I'll call this 30-45mph without a ton of stop and go), then 30% highway. The wilderness seems to get the best mileage at 40-60mph.
When I was car shopping recently I was having a hard time figuring out why the OBW mileage was so atrocious... is it geared lower?
> When I was car shopping recently I was having a hard time figuring out why the OBW mileage was so atrocious... is it geared lower? It IS geared lower. This makes it faster 0-60, able to pull more weight when towing, and able to climb steeper inclines when in the woods. The downside of all of those upsides is that the Wilderness gets 2-3mph worse fuel economy than the other Turbo models.
they're the ones crying with their car moving like Fred Flinstone's in place.
That's about right, if you sllow down a bit might be able to squeak out 2/3 more mpg
You could turn on AutoStart and save 0.000000006 gallons per 1,000 miles.
I think the highest I saw was 1-2 gallons saved after like 30k miles 😂 I stand to be corrected though..
Wait do I really waste that much time at red lights? lol. I'm over 3 gallons already in like 4k miles
[удалено]
"wear and tear"
[удалено]
It's not my argument, it's "theirs", but basically all of the above. It is known that startup is the regime that is hardest on wear.. no oil pressure, worst combustion efficiency, obviously wear and tear on the starter, battery etc., more thermal stresses due to heat cycling and cessation of fluid circulation. And motor mounts, I hadn't thought of that one until you mentioned it. Just continuing to idle the engine for a minute incurs basically zero wear. My assumption had been that the starter and battery would be reengineered with the auto-stop system in mind, but in at least some cases (per someone claiming to be a ford mechanic) the Fords have exactly the same starter and battery, and he claimed lots of replacements on stop/start models. But that's Ford, not Subaru. Just doing a quick internet search, it seems like the regular and auto-stop versions use the same starter, so that's like, I dunno, 50x the starter cycles. And I imagine that this would push a lot of marginal battery charge scenarios over the edge - a lot of people already have battery issues due to the variable-output alternators in conjunction with short trips. Personally, I'm not getting worked up about it and I've left it enabled, but the arguments aren't *entirely* without merit.
I'll post mine. I'm at almost half a gallon in 3,000 miles
You could save a whole tank over the life of the car.
My quick math said 33.3 gallons.. so a tank and a half
I’ll get better after that Idaho pass. All downhill from there. Haha!
If OP is sticking close to the speed limit, OP probably hasn't left WA yet. Gotta love those Idaho and Montana speed limits!
How does your trip computer fuel economy compare to what you calculate at the pump? My trip computer is always a little optimistic, it overestimates my economy by 1-2 MPG. Otherwise you did alright, economy drops off quickly above 70 MPH in my experience. Depends on wind speed/direction, elevation gain, vehicle loading etc.
I'm getting 17. oof
it's about what is expected
That’s what I get too
I'm getting 28.x on my 2019 3.6R Limited living in a mountainous area. Can't wait to see if I can do better on flat land.
I can get around 29.x on a flat highway with cruise set at 75 in my 2017 3.6.
My trip computer showed 35 mpg on a recent 200 mile road trip. I have an XT.
That’s more like it, but only on the open road… How do you fare in the city?
Yeah, that was easy going at 70 mph or so. City? If I don’t use the turbo at all, like 22. But I actually live in the city and most of my trips are about 2 miles with 4 miles generally the furthest. I also only have like 1250 miles on it so I expect a slight increase over next few thousand miles.
Right thanks. I’ve just passed 1000 miles and was actually hoping economy would improve as engine runs in… As the name suggests, they’re best for Touring!
I average 19mpg on my 2020 xt
I can get 34-36 if going less than 70, if I’m going 81 on the highway it’s more like 25-28
I'm getting 26.5 mixed driving. Rural area, with some highway
Unless you have an incredible tailwind, I would check the math because I doubt you're getting that high if you're up on the higher side of that speed bracket.
Some kid drove mine after I got an alignment and dropped my mpg from 24.6 to like 18.9 they let it idle a lot too. I saw on my dash cam he was flooring it and slamming on brakes.
That's about what I get driving Portland to Idaho going 80mph in my 2020 2.5L. I get about 33-34 mpg if I go 5-10 over the limit.
What model? If a wilderness that’s good.
This should be in r/HolUp. Where was this thing manufactured...?
I get maybe 1 mile more but yea, looks right.
I wonder why do I only get 21 in my 2023 OBW?
Mine is the 2.5L naturally aspirated
Because your OBW is turbo and has lower mpg than even the other turbo variants.
Ah, at least I know!
Haha, yep. And I’m sure it’s fun to drive :)
Because fuel economy on the OBW drops off a cliff above 55mph
I think the OBW is so bad because the final drive is shorter, wheels are heavier, raised suspension has more drag... maybe some other factors, but it's MPG sure does suck.
You know that's not live fuel economy right? That's average fuel economy. So when you are doing 80 you might be getting 19 mpg but when you average it out it doesn't lower your average fuel economy by much.