by robbieboy333, November 6, 2007
When I purchased my 06 Corolla Sport the sticker claimed my car would use 8.9 litres per 100 kilometers of driving in mixed driving conditions, and 5.8 litres per 100 kilometers of highway driving. I use 10 litres per 100 kilometers no matter how I drive, and I used 8.2 litres per /100 k of driving on trips where I'm driving at constant highway speeds. Do you all find the ratings to be less than accurate??
Bikeman982
Ratings are based on best case scenarios, where the driver is conservative.
Actual ratings will be lower if you drive fast, like a rabit, or mostly city driving.
Ratings also are if your car is in perfect tune and the tires are always correctly inflated.
What does the American conversion look like?
Where are you from? In the US, automakers do not come up with fuel economy numbers. Our EPA does. So, Toyota doesn't "claim" anything.
Bikeman982
Where are you from? In the US, automakers do not come up with fuel economy numbers. Our EPA does. So, Toyota doesn't "claim" anything.In California it is usually miles per gallon.
Same with the rest of the United States.
In California it is usually miles per gallon.Where are you from? In the US, automakers do not come up with fuel economy numbers. Our EPA does. So, Toyota doesn't "claim" anything.
Same with the rest of the United States.
Read the fist post. The US doesn't rate fuel economy in liters and kilometers. Are you drunk posting?
Bikeman982
Read my first post - I was asking for the translation (conversion) to miles per gallon, rather than liters per kilometer.In California it is usually miles per gallon.Where are you from? In the US, automakers do not come up with fuel economy numbers. Our EPA does. So, Toyota doesn't "claim" anything.
Same with the rest of the United States.
Read the fist post. The US doesn't rate fuel economy in liters and kilometers. Are you drunk posting?
There are ratings posted on every new car - if they come from the manufacturer or the EPA makes no difference.
Are you drunk posting? I don't drink.
Read my first post - I was asking for the translation (conversion) to miles per gallon, rather than liters per kilometer.In California it is usually miles per gallon.Where are you from? In the US, automakers do not come up with fuel economy numbers. Our EPA does. So, Toyota doesn't "claim" anything.
Same with the rest of the United States.
Read the fist post. The US doesn't rate fuel economy in liters and kilometers. Are you drunk posting?
There are ratings posted on every new car - if they come from the manufacturer or the EPA makes no difference.
Are you drunk posting? I don't drink.
Are your fingers broken? Can you not find google? I asked where the first poster was from. In the US, Toyota can't rate fuel economy. I don't know if that is true in other countries.
No, I'm not drunk posting. I was trying to simply find out where the poster was from. Not start a stupid flame war with you, yet again. Please stop post whoring.
Bikeman982
I was trying to find the English equivalent of the fuel ratings.Read my first post - I was asking for the translation (conversion) to miles per gallon, rather than liters per kilometer.In California it is usually miles per gallon.Where are you from? In the US, automakers do not come up with fuel economy numbers. Our EPA does. So, Toyota doesn't "claim" anything.
Same with the rest of the United States.
Read the fist post. The US doesn't rate fuel economy in liters and kilometers. Are you drunk posting?
There are ratings posted on every new car - if they come from the manufacturer or the EPA makes no difference.
Are you drunk posting? I don't drink.
Are your fingers broken? Can you not find google? I asked where the first poster was from. In the US, Toyota can't rate fuel economy. I don't know if that is true in other countries.
No, I'm not drunk posting. I was trying to simply find out where the poster was from. Not start a stupid flame war with you, yet again. Please stop post whoring.
I would be curious as to where he is from as well. My guess is Canada.
It's pretty simple to convert to US MPG from metric. You just divide 235 by whatever number you want to convert to. For example, 235/20 MPG would make 11.75 L/100km. To do the opposite, you just divide the metric number. For example, 235/11.75 would make 20 MPG. According to Robbieboy, his country rates the Corolla at:
City: 8.9 L/100km = 26.4 MPG
Highway: 5.8 L/100km = 40.5 MPG
His MPG: 10 L/100km = 23.5 MPG
Judging by this, it sounds like standard transmission. It also sounds like very realistic numbers, in fact rather conservative numbers. Here in the US, the 06 Corolla 5spd manual was rated at 32 MPG city, 41 highway (7.3 city, 5.7 L highway). Even on my automatic Corolla which is pre-vvti and over 9 years old, I usually average 29.5 to 30 MPG (7.8 to 8 L).
I don't know how your dipping to just 10 L/100km. That's pretty bad, even for hard driving. I once tested my car's MPG with VERY hard driving and was still able to get at least 26 MPG (9 L/100km), once again my car is pre-vvti, automatic, and 9 years old. It doesn't make sense how your fuel efficiency could dip that low, even with hard accelerations, cold starts, and long warmups. I would suggest checking all your systems, fluids, tire pressure, etc. Something definately isn't right.
When I purchased my 06 Corolla Sport the sticker claimed my car would use 8.9 litres per 100 kilometers of driving in mixed driving conditions, and 5.8 litres per 100 kilometers of highway driving. I use 10 litres per 100 kilometers no matter how I drive, and I used 8.2 litres per /100 k of driving on trips where I'm driving at constant highway speeds. Do you all find the ratings to be less than accurate??EDIT: Brendon beat me too it
8.9L per 100KM ~ 26.4 MPG
5.8L per 100KM ~ 40.5 MPG
10L per 100KM ~ 23.5 MPG
8.2L per 100KM ~ 28.6 MPG
Depends on driving conditions, state of tune, trip length, ambient temps, average speed during trips, and how the car was driven. Some people can get more or less than the estimated fuel economy. For the mixed driving - those numbers seem to be appropriate - should be higher for the constant driving, but not totally out of the question either. First thing I would check are tire pressures. If they are spot on to the placard on the door jam, glovebox stick = then try increase tire pressure in 2 PSI increments until you feel the ride has severly degraded or you start to exceed the maximum cold tire pressure stamped on the tire itself. Obviously, make sure that the air filter is in good shape, if equipped with a MAF sensor - might not hurt to try cleaning that out with appropriate solvent, dry it completely, reinstall - reset the ECM and see what the fuel economy does after that. Check the plugs - make sure they are in good shape, if in doubt replace them. Check the fluids are all within spec - viscosity wise. Make sure engine crankcase is not overfilled - even a little overfill will put extra pressure on the seals and decrease efficiency overall. Assuming the car is bone stock - if there are some modification, no tell what they can or cannot due to the mileage.
Bikeman982
Thanks for the conversions. That's exactly what I was looking for.
Now it can easily be understood by the average public.
Seems reasonable, if not low on the mileage.
I consider anything close to an average of 30 MPG to be good.
Of course city driving is less and highway (constant) driving more.
Thanks for the replys, this is a awsome tool for us toyota lovers. Im from Canada in beautiful Vancouver Island. My driving habits is somewhat mixed and i do tend to be heavy on the pedal, but i have tryed driving like a granny also to no avail. But in regards to tire pressure mine are perfect as I run a Tire Centre, the other systems are in fine order I suspect. I do have the opportunity to talk and converse with alot of Corolla owners and I hear the same complaint alot with other 06 Corolla owners with a auto tranny. I fully understand the perfect senerio when the numbers are determined by Toyota and all other auto makers but still have a vise with the deception they practice. I remember being involved with a class action law suit against Hyundai, for a 02 Santa Fae for falsely advertising more horsepower on the model I owned and was very6 underpowered, in which we all received double the warranty as a good gesture but a far cry from what the action was after, in which case I went back to my favorite Toyotas. I don't feel Toyota has been anyless honest than other manufactuers as i do believe they can achieve these rating while being driven on rollers on no grade with optimin air density. Cheers I look forward to reading all your posts.. Rob
I've found the best place for the most ACCURATE fuel economy figures is in Consumer's Reports magazine. My mileage is almost always identical to their findings. I'm sure that a lot of guys here will say that they are way too low, but, I've got a hard time sometimes believing that people can get between 35 and 40 MPG consistently and virtually never drop below 30 MPG ever, especially with an automatic.
I get 23-25 MPG in the city with a lot of cold weather, short trips and several traffic lights figured in.
On the plus side, I have gotten between 35-38 MPG on the highway at a steady cruise. (I've got the four speed overdrive auto transmission.)
All in all, I can't complain, it could be better, but, it is so much better than the V-8 Olds Cutlass I used to have. I can't imagine how expensive THAT car would be to drive now!!!!!! 
regards,
timkedz.
Bikeman982
When the price of gas goes up to $5 per gallon, people that get 30 MPG will enjoy their cars.
Take the SUV that gets 10 MPG and at $5 a gallon, it will cost a lot to fill 'er up!
Hi, I'm new to this site.
My wife and I just bought a new '08 CE with manual trans.
We are in Canada, and the fuel economy listing from the dealership seems way off.
You can check for yourself here:
http://www.toyota.ca/cgi-bin/WebObjects/WW...v102040e%2ehtml
It's listed as:
Manual transmission:
City: 7.1L/100km (40 MPG)
Highway: 5.3L/100km (53 MPG)
Automatic:
City: 7.8L/100km (36 MPG)
Highway: 5.6:/100km (50 MPG)
The MPG ratings are much higher than anything I've seen listed elsewhere.
I think maybe the conversions are just wrong
I calculate 7.1L/100km = 33 MPG and 5.3L/100km = 44 MPG.
Am I doing something wrong here, or are the Canadian numbers way off?
If so, isn't that false advertising? 
I'm not sure yet what the real world mileage is for the car.
I will keep you posted.
Hi, I'm new to this site.My wife and I just bought a new '08 CE with manual trans.
We are in Canada, and the fuel economy listing from the dealership seems way off.
You can check for yourself here:
http://www.toyota.ca/cgi-bin/WebObjects/WW...v102040e%2ehtml
It's listed as:
Manual transmission:
City: 7.1L/100km (40 MPG)
Highway: 5.3L/100km (53 MPG)
Automatic:
City: 7.8L/100km (36 MPG)
Highway: 5.6:/100km (50 MPG)
The MPG ratings are much higher than anything I've seen listed elsewhere.
I think maybe the conversions are just wrong
I calculate 7.1L/100km = 33 MPG and 5.3L/100km = 44 MPG.
Am I doing something wrong here, or are the Canadian numbers way off?
If so, isn't that false advertising?
I'm not sure yet what the real world mileage is for the car.
I will keep you posted.
http://www.convert-me.com/en/convert/fuel
Using this tool, I get 33.13 MPG city and 44.38 HWY. That is a bit optimistic still.
In the US, car companies don't come up with fuel economy numbers. The EPA does. What does Canada have? Is it fair to say that it is false advertising if Toyota didn't come up with the numbers?
The EPA has reevaluated how it comes up with fuel economy numbers and the new numbers are more realistic. Even a bit low in some cases.
The 08 US 5sp Corolla is rated at 28 city and 37 HWY.
We don't get that low, but the older numbers are wildly hard to impossible for most drivers to get. I think people in rural areas have a better shot, but if you live in the city, you will get ran over trying to drive slow and careful enough to try and get the older numbers.
Welcome to the forum - as fare the mileage discrepancy, don't forget - it depends on which "gallon" you mean, US or Imperial measure. That alone would account for the significantly higher MPG numbers - as Imperial gallons are 20% larger than the US gallon. Both "gallons" can be made from 8 "pints" - but an Imperial pint is 20oz, whereas the US pint is 16oz.
Welcome to the forum - as fare the mileage discrepancy, don't forget - it depends on which "gallon" you mean, US or Imperial measure. That alone would account for the significantly higher MPG numbers - as Imperial gallons are 20% larger than the US gallon. Both "gallons" can be made from 8 "pints" - but an Imperial pint is 20oz, whereas the US pint is 16oz.
The imperial gallon is no longer used for trade. I don't think Canada would have anything to do with it.
So yes, it looks like the difference is because the MPG rating used imperial gallons instead of US gallons. I find this very strange though, since any other MPG rating you see uses US gallons. This makes comparisons very difficult.
I don't know who gives the fuel economy ratings in Canada.
I'm not faulting Toyota, but it is pretty misleading. My old car was rated at 27MPG on the highway (I didn't know what it was rated for in L/100km, so I was comparing the MPG), so I was expecting double the fuel economy. It's not double, but it's still really good. So I'm not complaining.
Bikeman982
All I want to know is what number of miles I can get from the car using the same kind of gallons that are measure when you put gas in the car at the local gas station. That would be my miles per gallon.
The imperial gallon is no longer used for trade. I don't think Canada would have anything to do with it.
I think you are right - supposedly the Imperial gallon is no longer legal for trade or public administration purposes - atleast in the UK, but it is still used colloquially (papers, advertising, articles, etc.) in quite a few countries. In Canada, might be one of those things that get used so often, they forgot why they adopted it. Atleast they still give you the consumption of L/100km - that you can calculate yourself and valid everywhere in the world.
Hi,
So on the last tank of gas, I got 7.2L/100km (32.8MPG). This was probably about half city/half highway driving. It's not terrible, but not as good as advertised either. Should I expect the fuel economy to improve a bit after the break in period? Or is this about as good as it gets?
Thanks!
As the miles start to roll on you should start to see mileage start to improve. Break-in period, at least with the engine, is generally pretty short. To get the other stuff - like tires, brakes, etc. - take a bit more time. Tires have to scrub off their inital layer of tire mold release agent - once that happens, the tires will give you better all around consistency. Also you are working against the colder weather and some cases, a winter blend of gasoline. All these together tend to wreck havok with overall fuel economy.
Keep in mind that attempts to exceed the government rating is a sport - hypermiling - and is bragging rights if you succeed.
