Dodge Dart doing 59MPG? ofc...

Mike_04GolfTDI · Aug 29, 2014

All you have to do is look at Fuelly to see that the Dodge Dart gets about the same mileage as any other gas powered econo-box.

In the real world, it consumes 7.8L/100km or 30 MPG US.

It's nothing special. In fact, 2013 and 2014 Honda Civics are a similar size car, and use 6.9L/100km.

Advertising the Dart at 59 MPG is simply a deceptive practice, meant to trick people who don't do their homework into thinking this will be their typical fuel consumption.

nicklockard · Aug 29, 2014

jorioux said:
On their website, Dodge says the Dodge Dart 1.4L turbo 2014 does 59MPG...
http://www.dodge.ca/en/2014/dart/DART_AERO

Do you think this can be for real or is this a scam?

Typo. 4.8L/100km = 49 mpg, US miles per gallon.

mijdirtyjeep · Aug 29, 2014

gforce1108 said:
41 MPG sounds good until you factor in needing to run super instead of RUG. Then it's kinda pitiful. The Focus SFI and Mazda3 Skyactive will do 40 running regular.

Is the Focus SFI different from the SFE?

My work car is a 2013 Focus SFE and it is a pile of crap. Had to have the transmission pulled out at less then 20k miles cause some seal leaked fluid on the clutches. It has the worst shifting transmission I have ever rode in (like a teenager learning how to drive a manual). In our fleet of cars we have over 30 of them. Everyone who drives them says they hate the transmission.

Now for the fuel economy. In the 8300 miles I have been tracking with Fuelly, I am averaging 31.1mpg. The worst was when I ran E85 for a couple tanks. That had me down to 27mpg

Here is a link to the Fuelly page.
http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/focus/2013/mijdirtyjeep/264279http://

gforce1108 · Aug 29, 2014

mijdirtyjeep said:
Is the Focus SFI different from the SFE?

My work car is a 2013 Focus SFE and it is a pile of crap. Had to have the transmission pulled out at less then 20k miles cause some seal leaked fluid on the clutches. It has the worst shifting transmission I have ever rode in (like a teenager learning how to drive a manual). In our fleet of cars we have over 30 of them. Everyone who drives them says they hate the transmission.

Now for the fuel economy. In the 8300 miles I have been tracking with Fuelly, I am averaging 31.1mpg. The worst was when I ran E85 for a couple tanks. That had me down to 27mpg
Here is a link to the Fuelly page.
http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/focus/2013/mijdirtyjeep/264279http://

Only when I spell economy iconomy

Coworker has a '12 SFE. His commute is about 125 miles, mostly highway. He gets in the low 40s average for the 60k miles he's put on it. He has commented that the transmission gets easily confused (somewhat similar to VWs DSG) and it's absolutely horrible in the snow. Ford did some kind of reflash on the transmission early on. He likes it for what it is. A cheap, efficient means of commuting and it takes cheap RUG (only fills in Jersey)

mijdirtyjeep · Aug 29, 2014

gforce1108 said:
Only when I spell economy iconomy Coworker has a '12 SFE. His commute is about 125 miles, mostly highway. He gets in the low 40s average for the 60k miles he's put on it. He has commented that the transmission gets easily confused (somewhat similar to VWs DSG) and it's absolutely horrible in the snow. Ford did some kind of reflash on the transmission early on. He likes it for what it is. A cheap, efficient means of commuting and it takes cheap RUG (only fills in Jersey)

Yeah, I think mine just hates me

I will say though the Computer readout for mpg is always up around 38-40mpg. Just once it gets hand calculated it shows how bad it really is.
I laugh when everyone tells me diesel cost more than RUG and I should have just bought the wife a gasser. The Focus cost my work .115cents for every mile driven. The wife's 13 TDI costs me .97cents a mile to drive. While that is not a lot, it just shows that even paying more for fuel, I still come out ahead. Of course both are cheaper than running the Duramax, that cost me .238cents a mile

Mike_04GolfTDI · Aug 29, 2014

mijdirtyjeep said:
Yeah, I think mine just hates me

I will say though the Computer readout for mpg is always up around 38-40mpg. Just once it gets hand calculated it shows how bad it really is.

I laugh when everyone tells me diesel cost more than RUG and I should have just bought the wife a gasser. The Focus cost my work .115cents for every mile driven. The wife's 13 TDI costs me .097cents a mile to drive. While that is not a lot, it just shows that even paying more for fuel, I still come out ahead. Of course both are cheaper than running the Duramax, that cost me .238cents a mile

I think you need to move your decimal a couple places to the right...

0.097 cents per mile... So, if you drove 1000 miles, that would be 97 cents.

I know you mean dollars...obviously.

tikal · Aug 29, 2014

Good post and reminder. Thank you. Real world results much more trustable than advertised figures.
Also I see some folks announcing here that are getting much better mileage in their TDI's than the average in these forums. What they do not disclose is that on the highway they rarely go over 60/65 MPH (and they mostly do drive in the highway).
So there is a little bit of cheating going on ...

Mike_04GolfTDI said:
All you have to do is look at Fuelly to see that the Dodge Dart gets about the same mileage as any other gas powered econo-box.
In the real world, it consumes 7.8L/100km or 30 MPG US.
It's nothing special. In fact, 2013 and 2014 Honda Civics are a similar size car, and use 6.9L/100km.
Advertising the Dart at 59 MPG is simply a deceptive practice, meant to trick people who don't do their homework into thinking this will be their typical fuel consumption.

zoominMS3 · Aug 31, 2014

tditom said:
But you also referenced the Canadian estimate of 59mpg in the OP, no?

Edit: I just realized that the OP showed 59, not 49 mpg. This additional difference is likely due to Canada using a different fuel economy test method.
Sorry for any confusion I added.

No worries ?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

RDC98tdi · Sep 2, 2014

tikal said:
Good post and reminder. Thank you. Real world results much more trustable than advertised figures.
Also I see some folks announcing here that are getting much better mileage in their TDI's than the average in these forums. What they do not disclose is that on the highway they rarely go over 60/65 MPH (and they mostly do drive in the highway).
So there is a little bit of cheating going on ...

Hey now -- not true always. I have the 6MT and I think that knowing when to accelerate and when to shift allows me to drive 75+ mph on the highway and still kill the EPA rating.

For instance, I used to do 160 miles a day. With cruise set to 75 MPH on the speedo (Torque app readout and GPS ~= 73.3 mph), I could EASILY get 47 mpg each way, depending on weather or traffic, 50 mpg. That is pen and paper -- I drove almost 800 miles per week for 7 month in my car and the COMBINED average with work commute and my weekend driving was around 45 mpg with about 80% of those miles highway.

I usually accelerate pretty briskly up to around 2400-2600 in first and second, use 3rd and 4th to about 23-2400, then skip 5th and cruise in 6th but LIGHTLY use 6th just to maintain speed. If I have to accelerate, I will down shift to 4th or 5th to avoid bogging the engine until I get to about 70 mph, then I will just use 6th.

DieselBruce · Sep 3, 2014

RDC98tdi said:
Hey now -- not true always. I have the 6MT and I think that knowing when to accelerate and when to shift allows me to drive 75+ mph on the highway and still kill the EPA rating.

For instance, I used to do 160 miles a day. With cruise set to 75 MPH on the speedo (Torque app readout and GPS ~= 73.3 mph), I could EASILY get 47 mpg each way, depending on weather or traffic, 50 mpg. That is pen and paper -- I drove almost 800 miles per week for 7 month in my car and the COMBINED average with work commute and my weekend driving was around 45 mpg with about 80% of those miles highway.

I usually accelerate pretty briskly up to around 2400-2600 in first and second, use 3rd and 4th to about 23-2400, then skip 5th and cruise in 6th but LIGHTLY use 6th just to maintain speed. If I have to accelerate, I will down shift to 4th or 5th to avoid bogging the engine until I get to about 70 mph, then I will just use 6th.

I actually average about the same! I have 1 tank that I've kept below 75mph on the highway and that tank got me 48.7mpg. I had cruise set to 72-73 the whole time. My overall average is 44-45 doing anywhere from 75-90mph. Its really not too hard on these cars as long as you don't accelerate too quickly every light.

Oilerlord · Sep 3, 2014

JSWTDI09 said:
I am curious, in Canada do they use the US gallon or the Imperial gallon. 59 MPG Imperial is about 49 mpg in US gallons. I do not know which they are talking about, but either one is actually pretty good. However, saying fuel consumption is "as low as" 59mpg leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Who got that 59mpg and how did they do it. It is actually pretty easy getting that kind of mileage when going downhill on a long mountain road.

That said, Can you get that little 1.4 L engine in the US? I do not know.

Have Fun!

Don

No one in Canada relates an imperial gallon to MPG - except for companies like Dodge & Jeep that think they can trick a few folks by flashing ridiculous, over 40MPG figures. It's a sad attempt to mislead the public. I've seen Ford do this too.

Here's an example. A Jeep that supposedly gets 43 HWY MPG - that doesn't.

http://www.jeep.ca/en_dir/pdf/2014/fuel_jeep.pdf

Memo to Jeep: 6.6L per 100KM hwy is actually 35.6MPG...NOT 43MPG!

noxneon · Sep 8, 2014

I wanna see that dodge fart do an 800 mile tank, averaging 65-75 mph.

Max Period · Sep 8, 2014

Oilerlord said:
No one in Canada relates an imperial gallon to MPG - except for companies like Dodge & Jeep that think they can trick a few folks by flashing ridiculous, over 40MPG figures. It's a sad attempt to mislead the public. I've seen Ford do this too.

Here's an example. A Jeep that supposedly gets 43 HWY MPG - that doesn't.

http://www.jeep.ca/en_dir/pdf/2014/fuel_jeep.pdf

Memo to Jeep: 6.6L per 100KM hwy is actually 35.6MPG...NOT 43MPG!

"43 MPG" in Canada now means 7.8 L / 100 km or 3.3 Gal / 100 mi or 30 US MPG.

S2000_guy · Sep 8, 2014

jorioux said:
Back in 1981 the fuel consumption of TDIs have been the exact same if not less than TDIs of today. I just realise how in 34 years the automotive world have not changed in terms of fuel economy.

See for yourself:
http://www.fuelly.com/car/volkswagen/jetta?engineconfig_id=13154&bodystyleconfig_id=&submodel_id=

The 1981 diesels polluted the air too much; Federal standards today require much cleaner emissions. I had an '88 Ford Festiva that was rated 44 mpg highway by the EPA. Like an '81 VW diesel, its exhaust was so dirty that it's illegal to sell one as a new car today. Older cars already on the road are "grandfathered" on the theory that they will wear out and disappear from the road over time.

Dodge Dart doing 59MPG? ofc...

Mike_04GolfTDI

Top Post Dawg

nicklockard

Torque Dorque

mijdirtyjeep

Active member

gforce1108

Top Post Dawg

mijdirtyjeep

Active member

Mike_04GolfTDI

Top Post Dawg

tikal

Veteran Member

zoominMS3

Veteran Member

RDC98tdi

Veteran Member

DieselBruce

Veteran Member

Oilerlord

Veteran Member

noxneon

Veteran Member

Max Period

Veteran Member

S2000_guy

Veteran Member