Personal Picks: Gas-saving sedans

This month’s group couldn’t be timelier. With gas hovering at $4.00, all of us at Auto Test and the CR Autos Editorial group are being bombarded with questions from friends, neighbors, and readers about finding a more fuel-efficient car. As the Ratings (available to subscribers) show, overall fuel economy ranged from thrifty 32 mpg for the Toyota Corolla to a so-so 24 mpg for the Chevrolet Cobalt.

Here’s a look at our Personal Picks for cars with slow-moving fuel gauges.

Tom Mutchler: Two little letters here make a big difference: SE. With the addition of stability control, larger tires, and a telescoping steering wheel, the Hyundai Elantra SE scores considerably better than our well-liked Elantra GLS. It just goes to show what good dynamics can do for a car. Hopefully, shoppers using our Top Pick list or the July-issue road test pay attention and buy the SE instead of the more popular GLS. Getting the top-grade SE won’t break the bank either: with incentives, you can buy an automatic Elantra SE for under $16,000.

Sure, a Honda Civic is more fun to drive, but the Elantra is quieter, rides better, and has stability control that most Civics lack. (Note to Honda: You’re falling behind in that regard.) The Elantra’s dashboard doesn’t look like it was taken from a Klingon interceptor, either.

That said, if I was plunking down my own money for a car in this price range, it would be a hatchback. That body style adds cargo hauling flexibility with very little downside. So for now, I’m recycling last month’s Personal Picks—a Mazda3s hatchback or VW Rabbit. But the Elantra SE’s qualities have me looking forward to the fall introduction of the Elantra Touring (read: wagon).

Rick Small: These small sedans are enjoying a surge in popularity due to the ever-rising gas prices, but they are not all created equal, nor fit my needs. The Subaru Impreza is a nice car but only comes in AWD, which hurts fuel economy. Plus, the driving position doesn’t fit my tall body as well as some. The Hyundai Elantra SE is very nice, has a long warranty, and good fuel economy. The Toyota Corolla gets very good fuel economy but, again, I don’t fit in it so well. The Ford Focus has lost some of its grip and with it went braking distances and its once wonderful fun-to-drive factor. The Focus’ driving position is decent for tall drivers, but it has no rear headrests--a serious safety omission. The Saturn Astra has a nice ride, but it is slow responding and fuel economy falls short for this class. Of this group, I like the Volkswagen Rabbit the best. It feels more solid and sporty than the others here, plus it has a good driving position for taller people. I also really like the Mini but not this Clubman version. It does provide a little more room in the back but I dislike the split rear doors and big blind spot they create. The bigger Mini’s handling is not as crisp as the other versions, either. The Base or S are a blast to drive, get very good fuel economy and -- surprisingly -- have a very good driving position for tall drivers. The back seat is petty much for storage or very small passengers. Fuel economy for all these models are pretty good here, but if you want even more mpg get the manual transmission version.

For more on this gas-saving sedans test group, read the road tests and watch our car review videos.

Comments

[C. Adam]

I just read a short article about what I would consider to be a very important factor when rating "fuel efficient cars". Some of the cars may get good miles to the gallon but require or recommend the much more expensive premium fuel. According to the article, the cost of driving these cars can be the same as driving small SUV's. It said you could shorten the life of the engines of these vehicles if you use regular gasoline too often, the engines would run too hot. It was also noted that the manufacturers either bury the fuel requirements in the manuals or at the fuel tank, neither of which you "read" before buying the vehicles. The 2 vehicles mentioned were the new tiny two-seater by Mercedes/Smart and the Mini Cooper by BMW. The Mini Cooper was recommended in your article. We need to be educated on the difference between "fuel efficient" and "fuel economical" costs.

[Jeff Bartlett - Consumer Reports]

With elevated gas prices, it is important to be mindful of the operating costs for a vehicle that REQUIRES premium fuel. Ultimately, the best way to make a decision is to consider the owner costs.
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/pricing/what-that-car-really-costs-to-own-4-08/overview/what-that-car-really-costs-to-own-ov.htm

These factor depreciation, fuel costs, finance charges, sales tax, insurance, maintenance, repair, and sales tax -- ALL the real costs. We have this information on every model overview page, accessed through the pulldown menus on the main Cars pages and via the various ratings tables. Cost data is located within the Price & Costs tab on you get to a specific model.

[Joel Tilson]

Gas is at record price levels throughout the globe. Since the seventies I purchase only cars that deliver excellent gas economy and are reliable. I was told today from Toyota sales people that the 2010 Prius will be plug in Hybrids that can get up to 150 MPG! The new Prius will be available in April 2009. Does anybody know what will be the price or MSRP?

[Mike Payton]

I am saving just over 23% in gas driving 55mph when speed limit is 65mph & 45mph when speed limit is 55mph. I have vehicles at both ends of the size range. My '04 Honda Civic Ex 2dr gets over 42mpg vs 34 using the above method & my '98 Chevy G3500 box truck w/15ft cargo area weighing 8700+lbs went from 10mpg to almost 13mpg.
I also watch my tachometer & note at what speed it drops as the trans shifts into the next higher gear & that is where I set the cruise control. Less rpms equals less gas used. The best speed for best mpg is 45mph, any faster & the resistance of the air makes the engine work harder using more fuel.

[Al D.]

Rick Small's comment above mentions getting the manual transmission for more mpg. Time and time again, I read data that shows better fuel efficiency for manual transmissions than for automatics and I can't figure out why a computer can't choose gears more efficiently than a human driver. Then I thought about extra weight for automatic transmissions? Or maybe a 4-speed automatic transmission versus a 5-speed manual? Could you please shed some light on this subject?

[faith morphis]

Please be advised that contrary to your magazine asserting that the Toyota Prius gets mph in the 40's that is just wrong. I have been driving a Prius for 3 years now and I get consistently in the 50's (mpg).

What kind of tests did you use? I get a bit annoyed when I hear even the news on TV using your stats as though they are true. They are simply wrong. Please explain the discrepancy. A subscriber.

[Jeff Bartlett - Consumer Reports]

As the saying goes, results may vary -- in the real world. However, we test mpg in an extremely consistent, repeatable manner for laboratory-type results. In fact, we don't test to the gallon, we test to the CC based on our own inline fuel meter.

In addition to our oft-quoted overall mpg numbers, we also post city and highway figures on ConsumerReports.org (in the model overview pages). If your driving is best described as urban or highway, those figures should more closely represent what you are experiencing. With the Prius, our highway rating is 50 mpg.

For insights into fuel-economy testing, read:
http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2006/07/how_we_test_fue.html

And for a general overview of how we test:
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/news/2007/07/how-consumer-reports-tests-cars-7-07/overview/how_cr_tests_cars_ov_1.htm

[Mark]

Fuel requirements (91 or 87 octane) are not hidden. A simple google search will reveal the requirements for any car. Most cars are optimized for a certain octane rating based upon the agressiveness of compression ratios and timing curves. However, most cars run the timing until knocking occurs and then cut back the advancement. Then the car will advance again until it knocks. This allows some cars to "gain" HP due to better fuel being used. This has been proven with dyno sheets of 87 vs 91 octane rated gasolines in many cars.

The automatic transmission has a larger power loss due to items like a torque converter therefore using more fuel to overcome these losses.

[Ben]

Although the old adage that one should choose a manual transmission still holds true in most cases, for new Volkswagens it does not. The Rabbit has a 6 speed automatic which actually is rated the same as the 5 speed manual. The taller gearing of the automatic probably helps economy equal the manual.

I'd really like to see Consumer Reports do a "check test" of the new Chevrolet Cobalt XFE. Supposedly, it is much more efficient than the standard model because of a few tweaks in ECU programming, tires, aerodynamics, and gearing.

[Ipers]

I second the comment about premium fuel: CU seems to accept the additional cost of premium fuel in cars like the VWs without demurral, as if it's no big deal. For me, premium is a deal-breaker, and CU ought to discount its recommendations accordingly.