Post MPG for AUTO matrixes please

[kevintomb]

Please post your mileage numbers from ACTUAL tank calculations, not guesses of AUTO tranny matrixes WITH base engine, and with AMERICAN mpg, not canadian to reduce confusion......



I have an 03 base matrix with AUTO tranny.....ive done my mileage many times, and am basically very disappointed with it...its in immaculate condition is maintained perfectly and has normally inflated tires, checked ALL the USUAL stuff....

The bad part now....in EVERYDAY driving....some town, some open road, some highway.....a VERY normal mixture, we get USUALLY in the range of 26-28 MPG....on ONE highway only trip we got our max of 32.5, and in mostly town driving usually 25-26 MPG. For the life of me I CANT understand WHY its not getting at least a few MPG better. I see some people post numbers in here that almost sound UNBELEIVABLE......if most are getting one range of numbers, its hard to believe someone is getting 10MPG more than everyone else.

Before anyone says....driving style, etc...I and my wife both drive NORMALLY....not fast, not super slow, but like a normal car would be driven. We dont peel out or go 90 mph, we drive the speed limit, or a bit over it most of the time.

Now my other point I own a camry also, with the larger 2.4 engine and auto tranny and it weighs approx 450 lbs more than my matrix, but nonetheless gets almost the same exact mileage as the matrix, driving the same exact trips, etc........so it cant be driving style, it SEEMS the matrix ISNT getting what its potential is......

[Smar969905]

the matrix is heavy for the small motor that is in it, so the motor is working harder, which means it isnt as good on gas mileage. also, it has a higher drag coefficient than a camry. i used to have a 1990 camry with 5 speed in it. i beat the crap out of that car, and when i was done, it was still getting up to 28 mpg on normal mixed driving, and on a road trip i made, i got up to about 33 mpg, but that was cruising 80-85 most of the way. my matrix xrs (performance motor) has the 6 speed manual in it, and the best i have gotten in it was about 32 mpg.

one of the tricks to getting better fuel economy is to cruise at or below the speed limit. i won't say this for a fact, but most of the matrixes out there have lower gearing so the motor is revving up more at freeway speeds, and that in turn burns more fuel.

[kevintomb]

Originally Posted by Smar969905

the matrix is heavy for the small motor that is in it, so the motor is working harder, which means it isnt as good on gas mileage..

Uh the matrix I own weighs about 2800 lbs or so...thats not heavy..my camry is approx 3300 lbs...a 500 lb difference. Your explanation of an ENGINE working hard, makes NO difference..an engine makes a certain amount of power and uses a certain amount of fuel to make that power, it has no bearing on the actual SIZE of the engine. Putting a larger engine into the matrix would make it get WORSE gas mileage all other things being equal. A larger engine uses MORE gas to idle and coast, a larger engine has higher frictional losses ( usually ) a larger engine weighs more. If that was the case, why do toyotas estimates with the new 2.4 litre engine fall below those of the 1.8??

Your matrix is the 6 speed...I was asking for the AUTO tranny BASE model matrix, but thanks for the suggestions.

[cramar]

Originally Posted by kevintomb

Uh the matrix I own weighs about 2800 lbs or so...thats not heavy..my camry is approx 3300 lbs...a 500 lb difference. Your explanation of an ENGINE working hard, makes NO difference..an engine makes a certain amount of power and uses a certain amount of fuel to make that power, it has no bearing on the actual SIZE of the engine. Putting a larger engine into the matrix would make it get WORSE gas mileage all other things being equal. A larger engine uses MORE gas to idle and coast, a larger engine has higher frictional losses ( usually ) a larger engine weighs more. If that was the case, why do toyotas estimates with the new 2.4 litre engine fall below those of the 1.8??

Your matrix is the 6 speed...I was asking for the AUTO tranny BASE model matrix, but thanks for the suggestions.

Well...the key is "all things being equal." They never are—the variables are what counts! The Corvette gets phenomenal mileage for the HP it can put out. Just watched a YouTube vid of 400 hp vette getting 31 mpg at 60 according to its digital readout. The V8 is just loafing at <1,400 RPM! By comparison, small engines are pathetic.

I have only run a couple of tanks through my Matrix 2005 auto. With combined hwy & city I seem to be around 32 mpg. But statistically, two tanks are not a good sample. Disappointing for a 1.8L 4-banger though.

[Smar969905]

what my point is, is that the larger motor generally has more low range torque. for those who dont always race off the line, the larger motor wont have to rev up as much to get the same acceleration based on having the same gearing. also, when on the freeway, the larger motor has more torque to beat the wind resistance, which is primarily what you are fighting. as you are probably well aware, the higher you rev up, the more fuel you consume in the same amount of time. the larger motor pushing a heavier vehicle, but a vehicle that has less wind resistance should be comparable to a slightly lighter vehicle with more wind resistance when out for highway driving, and also be about as good for city driving.

i have said the same thing before, and i will probably say it again. it seems that i may be proven correct with the 09 matrix with the 2.4 liter camry motor.

[kevintomb]

Originally Posted by cramar

Well...the key is "all things being equal." They never are—the variables are what counts! The Corvette gets phenomenal mileage for the HP it can put out. Just watched a YouTube vid of 400 hp vette getting 31 mpg at 60 according to its digital readout. The V8 is just loafing at <1,400 RPM! By comparison, small engines are pathetic.

I have only run a couple of tanks through my Matrix 2005 auto. With combined hwy & city I seem to be around 32 mpg. But statistically, two tanks are not a good sample. Disappointing for a 1.8L 4-banger though.

Yeah actually a good friend of mine has a Z06, and on OCCASION it can get good mileage, he has the gauge that does that and on occasion he can get it over 32 mpg, weve done it a few times....But OMG at city speeds and accelerating it doesnt get anywhere NEAR that. Im not saying you are wrong at all cause ive seen HIS do it, but its only on a fairly level highway in top gear and TRYING to do it that his does....if you hit the gas some or even accelerate a bit it goes way down. So yes in THEORY it can do it..but in reality where we live (western pa) it USUALLY gets MUCH lower MPG. The matrix in reality probably SHOULD get about the same as a corvette on the highway, as the matrix has a good bit higher Cd. figure and its front profile is a decent amount larger, hence a higher drag figure. Whatever is saved on it being a 4 cylinder is lost in aerodynamic drag. But rest assured the vette my buddy owns DOESNT get great mileage overall....If it was only driven on flat highways at reasonable speeds 50-65 without much accelerating it does, but I think his ACTUAL averages are more in the 17-18 mpg range if I remember correctly...( will call him tomorrow to verify so sorry if Im off) but yeah on highway speeds its ALL aerydynamic drag that makes MOST of your fuel usage. That same corvette engine in a pick up would be getting much lower mileage....

[XR2003]

Automatic transmission with 1zz-motor.

City driving I get 28 mpg.

Highway I get a little over 38 mpg.

I can make it to Downtown Phoenix, AZ from Anaheim, CA on one 1 full tank.

Driving techniques - accelerate & brake smoothly, avoid momentum obstacles - meaning try to stay in motion smoothly.



Possible causes for your lower than expected mileage:

Dirty air filter
MAF sensor & IACV needs to be cleaned
Synthetic oil


All are small things that can be done to improve mpg.

Did I mention my mileage is from an XR model that has power everything, moonroof and the Matrix bodykit?

[cramar]

Originally Posted by Smar969905

i have said the same thing before, and i will probably say it again. it seems that i may be proven correct with the 09 matrix with the 2.4 liter camry motor.

While at the dealer today, I did some checking of Transport Canada's fuel consumption futures posted on the sheet on the window of new cars. According to their hwy mileage figures: (= means within 1 mpg)

2008 Camry V8 auto = 2009 Matrix 2.4L auto
2008 Camry 2.4 auto is better than 2009 Matrix 2.4 L auto
2008 Camry 2.4 std = 2009 Matrix 1.8L auto

I went in and asked the saleman why the Camry with same engine gets better mileage than Matrix? He said because the Camry is lighter and has less drag. I then said if people are interested in economy they would be better off buying a Camry instead of a Matrix. He said that's right!

P.S. Got 34.5 mpg this time (combined hwy and city) driving for mileage. My 2000 Jetta TDi under the same driving would net 54! [sigh]

[XlaSerX007]

Hello All,
Probably I'm part of the group that is getting poor mileage...
My last tank was one of my best since I own the car.
480km = 298.26mi
fill in 40.9L = 10.8 USGal
for a big 27.6mi/gal or 8.5L/100km for a 95% highway driving...

Usually I'm getting maximum 23-25mi/Gal sometimes less...

My Matrix XR 2007 automatic is stock except a K&N filter I install about 2 months ago.

Dealership said... that's normal....

[patrick5]

I've have a 2008 automatic and last week got 38 mpg highway cruising at 70-75 mph. Typical highway mpg seems to range from 32 to 38.

[edbso]

So I have a tank of gas through the car average 65 mph
got 41.39 miles per CDN Gallon. EPA is 36
I am satisfied. Was also running into a headwind.

Well I have the back side of the trip in.
Had the air-conditoning on, cruise set on 65 mph, 379.5 miles

Fuel Consumption
Litres per 100 Km .......... 6.66
Miles per Imperial Gallon .. 42.42
Miles per US Gallon ........ 35.32
Kilometres per Litre ....... 15.03

17.8% over the Highway EPA at 65mph.

'O3 XRS

[TRXR4KDS]

I usually get about 7l/100km on the highway when I don't push it over 120KPH, but I always end up hitting lift a few times just for fun

[zzyzx85]

Before my older sister started driving it, I was getting around 32 mpg w/ our '06 Matrix. Mostly highway.

Now that she's driving it (quick starts, shifts into drive while car is still rolling slowly backwards down out of driveway, cruises at 80 mph on the freeway all the time, surges throttle while on freeway, giving everyone in the car minor whiplash, overall: not a smooth driver), I'm guessing in the high 20s. I need to get her into a manual and ask her to drive that way and see what she thinks about the way she drives. I wonder if her boyfriend feels the same way...

[Mooch]

I'm beginning to wonder if my Matrix is running up to par after reading this. On average before, I was getting about 26 MPG. Since gas prices started edging higher, I switched my driving habits. I now drive 60 MPG instead of 70-80 on the highway, I don't tear out of a stop sign, I coast as much as I can in neutral and I am now getting about 32.5 MPG. I have an automatic 2005 Matrix XR 4WD, Which I know should get less mileage than a car that doesn't have 4WD and is a manual, but I am wondering if I could get that type of gas mileage without all the different driving techniques I have used after reading some of the reports here of people driving normally and getting more.

[edbso]

Dude; I have it figured out.
Pittsburgh is hillier than San Francisco!