2006 Corolla - fuel economy

Good day,

I'm seeking the opinion of Toyota Corolla drivers out there.

My wife and I just bought a 2006 Corolla last month. We've very happy
with the car overall, as we expected we'd be (it's our fifth Toyota
product, although we traded up from a '99 Tercel - BIG difference!)

I'd just like to get some opinions about the fuel economy. It's good,
but we expected a bit better. We're getting an average of 6.65 l/100 km
(that works out to 35 MPG (US) or 42 MPG (Imp)). We're about 50/50 for
highway vs. city driving. The car is a 5-speed CE model Corolla.

The car has about 2,200 km on it now... do Toyotas need a longer
break-in period than that to see ideal fuel economy? I've heard that the
mileage gets better after the first 8,000 km oil change - is there any
truth to that?

Thanks for any comments!

wmd

Yes, big improvement on mpg after first 8000km as on my 2005 corolla

wmd wrote:
[color=blue]
> Good day,
>
> I'm seeking the opinion of Toyota Corolla drivers out there.
>
> My wife and I just bought a 2006 Corolla last month. We've very happy
> with the car overall, as we expected we'd be (it's our fifth Toyota
> product, although we traded up from a '99 Tercel - BIG difference!)
>
> I'd just like to get some opinions about the fuel economy. It's good,
> but we expected a bit better. We're getting an average of 6.65 l/100 km
> (that works out to 35 MPG (US) or 42 MPG (Imp)). We're about 50/50 for
> highway vs. city driving. The car is a 5-speed CE model Corolla.
>
> The car has about 2,200 km on it now... do Toyotas need a longer
> break-in period than that to see ideal fuel economy? I've heard that the
> mileage gets better after the first 8,000 km oil change - is there any
> truth to that?
>
> Thanks for any comments!
>
> wmd[/color]

EPA rated the Corolla 5-speed at 32 city/41 highway (US), so I'd say your
mixed driving mileage of 35mpg(US) is good.

My folks have an '04 Corolla CE (which is same as your '06) and they said
they got 40mpg(US) on one particular highway trip last fall. And theirs is
an automatic.

wmd wrote:
[color=blue]
> My wife and I just bought a 2006 Corolla last month. We've very happy
> with the car overall, as we expected we'd be (it's our fifth Toyota
> product, although we traded up from a '99 Tercel - BIG difference!)
>
> I'd just like to get some opinions about the fuel economy. It's good,
> but we expected a bit better. We're getting an average of 6.65 l/100 km
> (that works out to 35 MPG (US) or 42 MPG (Imp)). We're about 50/50 for
> highway vs. city driving. The car is a 5-speed CE model Corolla.
>
> The car has about 2,200 km on it now... do Toyotas need a longer
> break-in period than that to see ideal fuel economy[/color]

I've found Consumer Reports mileage figures to be realistic, and they
probably rate the Corolla at 20-23 MPG city, 40-45 highway. I've
gotten 10% improvement after the first 5,000-10,000 miles, and back
when Corollas were carbureted the idle speed would increase from about
750 RPM to 900.

Thanks for the replies - appreciated!

Before purchasing, I read a review on Canadian Driver where they tested
a Corolla (and nine other cars) in a realistic "roadtrip" driving
situation. They got 911 kilometres from the Corolla before they ran out
of gas.

Mind you, that was from full to bone dry, but I was still expecting ~700
km from a tank, assuming a fill-up when the gas light comes on. We're
getting just over 600 km thus far.

"http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/pw/50-litre.htm"

Interestingly, the gas light comes on with 1/5th of the tank still
remaining... I've only pumped about 40 litres into the car so far. So
that could be skewing my numbers a bit.

We'll see how it goes - like I say, I'm not exactly disappointed in the
mileage... I just think the car can do better! :)

wmd

On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 21:56:14 GMT, wmd <wmd55ca@yahoo.caNOSPAM> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Good day,
>
>I'm seeking the opinion of Toyota Corolla drivers out there.
>
>My wife and I just bought a 2006 Corolla last month. We've very happy
>with the car overall, as we expected we'd be (it's our fifth Toyota
>product, although we traded up from a '99 Tercel - BIG difference!)
>
>I'd just like to get some opinions about the fuel economy. It's good,
>but we expected a bit better. We're getting an average of 6.65 l/100 km
>(that works out to 35 MPG (US) or 42 MPG (Imp)). We're about 50/50 for
>highway vs. city driving. The car is a 5-speed CE model Corolla.
>
>The car has about 2,200 km on it now... do Toyotas need a longer
>break-in period than that to see ideal fuel economy? I've heard that the
>mileage gets better after the first 8,000 km oil change - is there any
>truth to that?
>
>Thanks for any comments!
>
>wmd[/color]

My youngest sister has one. It's an automatic LE version. She get's
38mpg mixed driving. She's a slow driver though.

Why would anybody even think to take the opinion of a person who would drive
a vehicle till it ran our of gas? How smart can that person be to not have
enough sense to refill before they ran our of gas? LOL


mike hunt


"wmd" <wmd55ca@yahoo.caNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:nXFZf.43201$%H.35814@clgrps13...[color=blue]
> Thanks for the replies - appreciated!
>
> Before purchasing, I read a review on Canadian Driver where they tested a
> Corolla (and nine other cars) in a realistic "roadtrip" driving situation.
> They got 911 kilometres from the Corolla before they ran out of gas.
>
> Mind you, that was from full to bone dry, but I was still expecting ~700
> km from a tank, assuming a fill-up when the gas light comes on. We're
> getting just over 600 km thus far.
>
> "http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/pw/50-litre.htm"
>
> Interestingly, the gas light comes on with 1/5th of the tank still
> remaining... I've only pumped about 40 litres into the car so far. So that
> could be skewing my numbers a bit.
>
> We'll see how it goes - like I say, I'm not exactly disappointed in the
> mileage... I just think the car can do better! :)
>
> wmd[/color]

Mike Hunter wrote:[color=blue]
> Why would anybody even think to take the opinion of a person who would drive
> a vehicle till it ran our of gas? How smart can that person be to not have
> enough sense to refill before they ran our of gas? LOL[/color]

lol! Obviously the article isn't suggesting that you run a vehicle dry.
The point of the article, I think, was to test to see which vehicles
were best on gas overall, from full to empty. Running them dry would be
the most accurate test of which had the best fuel economy, would it not?

That should reasonably translate into how the vehicles perform in normal
driving situations (i.e. filling up at the fuel light, or at 1/4 of a
tank according to the manual!) :)

wmd

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:dAWdnWbhF-Wwk6XZUSdV9g@ptd.net...[color=blue]
> Why would anybody even think to take the opinion of a person who would
> drive a vehicle till it ran our of gas? How smart can that person be to
> not have enough sense to refill before they ran our of gas? LOL
>
>
> mike hunt
>[/color]
----------------------
My father's mother, rest her soul, swore up and down you could extend the
little bit of gasoline by turning on the wipers. I doubt she was able to
travel further. Maybe the gas gauge needle went towards full when she turned
the wipers on.

mark_

Not really, unless you were testing two versions of the same car. The
different brands may have different tank volumes or shapes which can effect
the total amount of gasoline that can be consumed before it runs our of
fuel.. If it was indeed a test of similar cars to see which vehicles were
best from full to empty the one with the largest tank would win .

Why not simply do a normal refill, as does everybody else, to determine the
amount consumed over a determined distance over a given number of tanks
full?


mike hunt


"wmd" <wmd55ca@yahoo.caNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:3NUZf.34452$K11.32433@clgrps12...[color=blue]
> Mike Hunter wrote:[color=green]
>> Why would anybody even think to take the opinion of a person who would
>> drive a vehicle till it ran our of gas? How smart can that person be to
>> not have enough sense to refill before they ran our of gas? LOL[/color]
>
> lol! Obviously the article isn't suggesting that you run a vehicle dry.
> The point of the article, I think, was to test to see which vehicles were
> best on gas overall, from full to empty. Running them dry would be the
> most accurate test of which had the best fuel economy, would it not?
>
> That should reasonably translate into how the vehicles perform in normal
> driving situations (i.e. filling up at the fuel light, or at 1/4 of a tank
> according to the manual!) :)
>
> wmd[/color]

Mike Hunter wrote:[color=blue]
> Not really, unless you were testing two versions of the same car. The
> different brands may have different tank volumes or shapes which can effect
> the total amount of gasoline that can be consumed before it runs our of
> fuel.. If it was indeed a test of similar cars to see which vehicles were
> best from full to empty the one with the largest tank would win .[/color]

They did apparently account for that by ensuring that each car only had
50 litres of fuel to begin with.

[color=blue]
> Why not simply do a normal refill, as does everybody else, to determine the
> amount consumed over a determined distance over a given number of tanks
> full?[/color]

Perhaps... I can't say what their rationale was for writing the article
or their testing procedures! :) I think they were simply trying to
determine which of the ten vehicles had the best fuel economy, and put
the cars to a common test. Here's the link to the article again, if
you're interested:

"http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/pw/50-litre.htm"

It was interesting, none the less! lol

wmd

wmd wrote:
[color=blue]
> Mike Hunter wrote:[color=green]
>> Not really, unless you were testing two versions of the same car. The
>> different brands may have different tank volumes or shapes which can effect
>> the total amount of gasoline that can be consumed before it runs our of
>> fuel.. If it was indeed a test of similar cars to see which vehicles were
>> best from full to empty the one with the largest tank would win .[/color]
>
> They did apparently account for that by ensuring that each car only had
> 50 litres of fuel to begin with.
>[color=green]
>> Why not simply do a normal refill, as does everybody else, to determine the
>> amount consumed over a determined distance over a given number of tanks
>> full?[/color]
>
> Perhaps... I can't say what their rationale was for writing the article
> or their testing procedures! :) I think they were simply trying to
> determine which of the ten vehicles had the best fuel economy, and put
> the cars to a common test. Here's the link to the article again, if
> you're interested:
>
> "http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/pw/50-litre.htm"
>
> It was interesting, none the less! lol
>
> wmd[/color]

Please don't feed the trolls.

BTW, the mpg figures in the article are based on imperial gallons and not
U.S. gallons. Multiply by 0.8 to convert to miles per U.S. gallon.

How would that effect the car with a fuel tank pickup that is 1/2 inch
higher in the tank?


mike hunt


"High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:sddyjjrjpd4a.dlg@hightech.misfit...[color=blue]
> wmd wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Mike Hunter wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> Not really, unless you were testing two versions of the same car. The
>>> different brands may have different tank volumes or shapes which can
>>> effect
>>> the total amount of gasoline that can be consumed before it runs our of
>>> fuel.. If it was indeed a test of similar cars to see which vehicles
>>> were
>>> best from full to empty the one with the largest tank would win .[/color]
>>
>> They did apparently account for that by ensuring that each car only had
>> 50 litres of fuel to begin with.[/color][/color]

High Tech Misfit wrote:
[color=blue]
> Please don't feed the trolls.[/color]

Gotcha... I didn't lurk long enough to know better, I guess! :)
[color=blue]
> BTW, the mpg figures in the article are based on imperial gallons and not
> U.S. gallons. Multiply by 0.8 to convert to miles per U.S. gallon.[/color]

I figured as much... the figures seemed a bit high for US mpg.

You mentioned that your folks got 40 mpg on a highway trip in an
automatic, so that sounds promising for summer vacation mileage.

wmd