I believe the EPA highway estimates are based off traveling at 55mph, so it's not surprising you're not experiencing mpg in the high 30s and low 40s. Having said that, 29 is awfully low if you do drive mostly highway. I'm a 90%+ city (with crap traffic) driver, and I'm averaging about 30 for the life of my car so far (only 1400 miles). I do practice some semi-conservative driving techniques (coasting up to traffic lights longer than my fellow Angelenos generally appreciate, moderate acceleration, cruising in optimal gears/speeds).

As much as this may suck, try dropping 5mph off your highway speed and see what happens. Select the "instant mpg" feature on your display.. it's probably far from accurate, but it gives you an idea if you're driving efficiently or not. Also, cruise control can help your mileage if you have fairly flat and smooth drives, but if you have to do any hills, take the cruise off.

 

^^^ There's your problem.
Slow down.

 

Hold on a sec Nova. This is 2012 and I should not have to limp my new car around town to obtain conservative MPG averages, especially when the high MPG ratings were a key selling point of the vehicle. I am by NO means a lead foot, but come on. For example: I have a 1994 Ford Ranger 3.0 V-6 that religiously gets me 18-20 mpg no matter how hard I push it. I can drive 70-80mph all day long and I still am good. I am simply stating, as I believe others are and are learning, that WE expected a bit more in the MPG than what we are actually getting. We were told one thing, but are experiencing something different.

I just want to be told the straight skinny on things, don't sugar it or stretch it out to the extremes. I called my salesman (great guy) and told him of my MPG results. He informed me, "Well, you have to learn how to drive the vehicle differently than what you are used to." Ah.....excuse me? You never gave me that "disclaimer" prior to the sale. Then it was "You are going to love the HIGH EPA of 31-40 MPG this little car gets all day long!" hmmmmm. Now, I have to set the cruise control at 55mph, turn off the A/C, set the ECO button to on, and make sure I have gone to the bathroom before driving to lighten the load, before I can experience the advertized fuel averages. Again, I love the car and it is definitely a win-win for me, I just wish they would have been a bit more realistic with the EPA figures. The figures they pull off a stationary dino or by driving at a secluded track on in Korea are not the same as USA driving standards. :-)

 

It doesn't matter what year it is. Physics laws can't be broken. The faster you go, the less fuel mileage you get. As speeds increase, so does wind resistance (exponentially). That's Physics 101.

The MPG ratings are done at 55-mph. If you want get the ratings, then drive 55-mph. If you want to go faster than 55-mph, then expect lower fuel economy.

 

In a way I agree with you both. SoCal, technically you could have researched the specs on how EPA reaches its numbers and then understood beforehand that you might not get them with your typical speeds.

I do however sympathize with your reasoning. I had a 2001 VR6 Jetta with a 4 speed automatic transmission that got 20-24mpg for me, and that thing zipped around and had some fun torque, let me tell you! Never once did I give a thought to conservative driving techniques, on the contrary, I drove it rather sportily, and I consistently got that mpg.

Now I have this new SIX speed variable transmission, in a smaller and lighter body, with a smaller engine, and several other features with improved mileage in mind, and I'm getting what.. 8mpg more. AND driving like a grandma to get it! Keep in mind that I'm talking about city driving, where wind resistance doesn't play as much of a part.

Even though the EPA revised their standards in 2008, they are still too liberal with their numbers imo. Most people will never see EPA numbers. I for one drive in city traffic 90% of the time, and half of that is pretty congested. I don't know what kind of cities EPA had in mind, but stopping once a mile? Please! I often have to stop once a *yard* At any rate, if I remember correctly, the EPA never actually puts cars "into the field", they just run them on those roller "car treadmills" with a computer simulating driving conditions. No wonder they're hard to attain.

I'll end this rant with a suggestion: my BEST mileage comes at 45mph. This is the point at which the highest gear kicks in (on my automatic). If you have a choice between cruising at 40mph or 45, kick it up a bit. Conversely, the faster you go beyond 45mph, the lower your efficiency will be. Just put your instant mpg function on your display, you'll see what I'm talking about.

 

Marathon Blue,

Thank you for at least exploring my thought process . I understand the physics process just fine, and I also understand convoluted, red tape, EPA B.S. too, which tends to fall within the shady economics arena. Bottom line, EPA says: "If you want to sell your cars here, make sure they fall within these new translucent guidelines." So, the car manufactures do what ever they can to obtain those figures by the least expensive means possible, including removing a standard spare tire and replacing it with a cheap air pump and a small bag of fix-a-flat! Weight to power ratio: physics once again.....

Pretty soon, car companies are going to tell the buyers, "if you want to achieve 40mpg, you have to be under 6 foot tall and weigh under 200 lbs." That includes a half tank of gas and 1.5 passengers going down hill. The American public can accept the truth about true MPG ratings, just don't tell us openly we are going to expect a result, e.g 30-40mpg and then throw a whole can of behind the scene "conditions" to make those ratings a reality. There are too many "conditions" placed on something that should be already worked into the equation. After reality based testings, just tell me what the numbers really are. I can handle it. The problem is, they (the car companies) are all in the market to out due one another and they know their sales will plummet if they speak the truth without softening the blow a bit.

Nova, when I mentioned the year, 2012, I was simply implying the technology is readily available to produce a car which can reach 30-35mph all day long without having to drive it around like it you had a lidless cup of hot coffee in your lap. The problem is that it is too $$$$$ and they can make more money with what they are doing now.

Rant concluded.

 

Yes, the technology does exist but that type of car you wouldn't want to drive. It wouldn't have crash protection (multiple air bags, ABS, TCS), electronic "toys" (navigation, backup cameras, multi speaker sound systems, power seats, power windows, heated seats, AWD, 6-speed transmissions) and wouldn't have nice 17 or 18" wheels. All these things add weight and lower fuel economy. We make lighter and ligher parts yet we keep adding more and more things to the car that keep the weight the same.

For example:
- my 2006 Tucson FWD 2.7L V6 4-speed automatic is rated 18/24 mpg and weighs 3370-lbs (source)
- your 2012 Tucson AWD 2.4L 4-cylinder 6-speed automatic is rated 21/28 mpg and weighs 3366-lbs. (source)

As you can see, 2 cars with the same weight yet yours is more eficient but it still weights a lot. I regularly get 22-mpg in about 50/50 driving in my less efficient Tucson. It's all about driving style.

 

I have a 2012 Accent, automatic, with about 5,300 miles on it. I like everything about it but the mileage.
I ive and drive in a rural area averaging 1 light or stop sign per mile.
I thought that was closer to highway but I've been told it's not.( I'm from Brooklyn and 1 stop per mile is not city driving, city is closer to 5 - 10 stops per mile, in stop and go traffic).
I too am driving absolutely like a grandmother, coasting, staying below 2rpm when accelerating, watching every little thing and not enjoying the ride. I'm averaging 32.5. My previous car, a 1994 Geo Prism with 196,000 miles on it averaged 28, driving how I pleased. I've done 150 miles on straight highway but have never averaged above 36 mpg.
I too am very disappointed with this. It's not the price of gas, but the lack of what you expected from your ride. I'm afraid if I ever drive relaxedly, even in a rural area, I'd get below 30mpg and in a city, who knows? Who is responsible for the 30 - 40 estimates? It deserves an explanation. Do I have to make sure I'm barefoot and with no change in my pockets to do a little better? (Not a rant, a justified thoughtful complaint).
(Check out a site called "Fuelly" you can post your mileage see what other cars and drivers are getting). I'm on there as "Blue Bonnet".
Thanks

 

Okay, putting your logic to the test: If my car is lighter, and has all that JAZZ removed from it, minus the cool 16's, then why am I/we NOT obtaining the 30-40mpg we were all sold on. It is not just the style of driving, it also has to do with design and political B.S. Inflated EPA numbers (obtained only with special conditions attached) like FINE PRINT in a contract is not really as up front as the American people want.

Why do you think the guzzlers sell so well? It is because people make the choice to purchase them KNOWING what they are getting. When I shopped around, I purchased my Hyundai's on the premiss I was going to achieve the MPG THEY advertised for just driving the car, not caressing and babying it all round town. Simply put: Test the cars as your consumers drive them and give them the straight dope on it! If I would have known then what I know now, I may have purchased a different vehicle. One that averages what the sticker says no matter how I drive it. That is why there is such a difference in the MPG ratings, e.g. blah-blah City, blah-blah Hwy. Ratings used to mean the incorporation of varied driving habits, lead foot vs. light foot. The city MPG is what you got when you drove aggressively and the Hwy MPG is what you got when you were less on the peddle. The reason so many of us, and the number is growing on this particular issue, is when just driving normal, we don't even get the lowest estimated number of 30 MPG, most are seeing 28-29MPG. Again, not a dismal number in regards to fuel economy, but NOT close to the mid 30's we would have expected for just driving as a normal everyday schmuck. Come on! Pretty soon Hyundai is going to be giving driving classes as a prerequisite to obtain THEIR respective EPA numbers.

My 1994 Corvette was one of the best fuel economy vehicles I have ever owned that it had a 330HP LT1 engine in it. It was light and had all the bells and whistles on it. Still, it averaged 18-24 MPG religiously, and I stomped on it!

Let's just come to an agreement. I think Hyundai really played with the numbers this year to stay on top of the competition. They technically didn't tell a lie, but there again, they aren't really speaking the truth either. Smoke and mirrors I agree with DavidG all the way.

 

Hyundai didn't do anything different than any other car company. The fuel mileage ratings are done by the EPA, not Hyundai.