02-06-2013, 11:23 AM | #1 |
Private
3
Rep 58
Posts |
Three different MPG displays all show different values?
I have not been driving my new X1 much (in favor of my better mileage TDI old car thus far), so I have not figured out the X1 MPG displays yet. But this has me feeling a bit like a dunce - since its operation is not self obvious to me - but should be. Argh.
We have three displays that give the MPG info - "Onboard Info" vs "Trip Computer" vs the mini odometer display controlled by the stalk. Last week or so, I chose "Reset All" from the Trip Computer menu for the very first time, but currently each of three displays seem to give me different mpg and average speed numbers? How? The manual explains this poorly. What's the formula here? When is each reset?
So what I thought was "all my miles driven getting the car new" since I never did a manual reset myself (until last week), might not have been? It might have been reset on every Nav use or every tank refill? It doesn't help that Onboard Info doesn't include what the mileage count is beside the average speed and MPG numbers. How do I know what it is measuring - and since when? I'll probably figure this out eventually by trial and error, but can anyone explain it to me or give me hint? It should not be this confusing. Maybe it's just me. |
02-06-2013, 12:47 PM | #2 |
Private
3
Rep 58
Posts |
> Hold the button on the signal indicator stalk while mpg is displayed until it resets. That resets whatever's displayed only.
Found this in my web search... not sure I have done this, but maybe I did. At least it's a start along the path toward figuring out why the three mpg numbers are different... Update#2 - Upon re-reading the X1 manual... 1. The ECO PRO bonus range DOES get automatically reset upon a gas tank refill. 2. The reset command from Trip Computer seems to reset only the trip computer going by the section title header (no mention of the "ALL" I seem to remember from the car) 3. No mention about what resets the Onboard Info? 4. It's curious that the pictures of Onboard Info vs Trip Computer on page 71 ALSO show a difference in Average Speed (but not MPG) Last edited by Teleskier; 02-06-2013 at 01:36 PM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
02-07-2013, 07:02 AM | #3 |
Captain
19
Rep 619
Posts |
I'm thinking of ordering an X1 soon, but want to get one as a loaner to verify efficiency under my foot/commute. You really get 55 in the tdi and 20 in the x1? I'm so pissed they didn't bring a diesel for us. If I can't eke out 28-29 driving moderately (65-75) on my mostly hwy free flowing 40mi commute, I may be on to a '14 cx-5 touring- that has enough power to get out of its own way now- but still no diesel.
__________________
2015 Valencia Msport X1 sdrive28i
2014 Mazda CX-5 AWD gt Was: 2009 Montego/terra 128i 6MT (ouch)...great car |
Appreciate
0
|
02-07-2013, 08:27 AM | #4 | |
New Member
0
Rep 20
Posts |
Quote:
My X1 has only 400 miles on it so far, so I'm really hoping things improve with a little more break-in. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-07-2013, 09:49 AM | #5 |
Captain
19
Rep 619
Posts |
Thanks, that's kinda frustrating- my 128 that's rated 28hwy routinely beats that, and blows through 30 on trips. Granted most of the frustration is that 33 appears to be a bold faced lie because really 28 for a 3700-3800lb awd anything that hits 60 under 7 is actually pretty darn good, but 26-27 in a 35i is even more impressive- dammit!
__________________
2015 Valencia Msport X1 sdrive28i
2014 Mazda CX-5 AWD gt Was: 2009 Montego/terra 128i 6MT (ouch)...great car |
Appreciate
0
|
02-07-2013, 11:55 AM | #6 | ||
Private
3
Rep 58
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
Now on the X1 - it seems that no matter how I drive - I only get 20.something mpg. I meant to write the other day. I ran an errand in eco-pro mode where I reset all values. Mostly highway on RT2. I made a conscious effort to not step more than 33% into the gas pedal (watched the 'live' mpg needle to stay above 25mpg). It was pathetic slow and dangerous. Huge gaps open since I cannot keep up with traffic from every tiny slow down. Every car cut in front of me. Then a SCHOOL BUS cut in front of me, the gap was so big and my acceleration so poor. Rt2 inbound had no traffic stops. I coasted to every slow down. I turned my engine off manually at the two red lights (ASS will not engage for me recently). After all this eco excellence - I got a piss-poor 23.x mpg in what I'd consider the very best conditions I could be for typical (but real life) rural eco driving. On the way back, outbound Rt2 had some traffic in the rotary where it was not stopped but was 5-10mph slow while making its way around. There on that return leg, I was back to 20.x again while in eco but without the prior leg's coasting-in-neutral tricks! Nuts! I could take going down from TDI 49 mpg down to X1 EPA 33. But real-life 49 down to real-life 20 is driving me crazy! I should be wanting to drive my new X1, not having "more acceleration and fun and better mpg to boot" in my 12-year-old old VW. I really have to figure this out. This weekend I'm heading up for another long ski trip drive. I will reset all the numbers and watch the car like a hawk. For fun and my own science, I might try eco on the way up and sport on the way back. Something tells me both are going to be the same bad 20 mpg number. I'll also top off the tank to get the non-computer numbers. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
02-07-2013, 12:24 PM | #7 |
Captain
19
Rep 619
Posts |
Wow that's depressing but thanks for the in-depth coverage there. You rolling 17s or 18s- stock or winter tires? You broken in yet? Let us know how the longer trip does. I just booked my last covered service appt and they said they'd hold me an X1 28i xdrive from their fleet. If I have to hypermile the thing just to see 25 I really don't know, I'll probably press my luck (and wait) for the CX-5d or just say screw it and the CX-5g and deal with the few things I hate about it. Mostly its a pretty nice little truck, and I'm keeping the 1 so all is certainly not lost.
__________________
2015 Valencia Msport X1 sdrive28i
2014 Mazda CX-5 AWD gt Was: 2009 Montego/terra 128i 6MT (ouch)...great car |
Appreciate
0
|
02-07-2013, 03:35 PM | #8 |
Captain
17
Rep 675
Posts |
As I posted in the other thread, the MPG computed by the displays are way off in my experience. I just hit 1200 miles but I'm getting about 26 MPG combined now (calculated manually when I fill at the pump). Computer shows anywhere between 21.7 and 23.0 MPG.
Monterra, coming from another 128i owner you will be happy with the X1...much more so than the Mazda IMHO. Test drive and see. |
Appreciate
0
|
02-07-2013, 03:49 PM | #9 |
Major General
4465
Rep 9,160
Posts |
Concur, we changed from a 135i to an X1 35i, and they feel very similar, as I've said elsewhere, our X1 actually gets slightly better city mileage than our N54 1er did, but slightly less hwy.
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-07-2013, 04:06 PM | #10 | |
Captain
19
Rep 619
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
2015 Valencia Msport X1 sdrive28i
2014 Mazda CX-5 AWD gt Was: 2009 Montego/terra 128i 6MT (ouch)...great car |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-07-2013, 04:30 PM | #11 | |
Second Lieutenant
8
Rep 234
Posts |
Quote:
To be fair, there are plenty of forum members who are satisfied with their mileage. Obviously, I am not one of them. I'm starting to wish I had waited for the Q5 TDI or GLK diesel. The CX-5 diesel, when/if it comes to the US, should be an impressive value if you can live without some of the extras. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-08-2013, 07:20 AM | #12 |
Private
5
Rep 68
Posts |
Out of curiousity, isn't diesel more expensive than premium? Here in Leesburg VA, for today, one local outlet is selling premium at 3.75 per gallon and 3.89 per gallon for diesel.
Factoring in MPG for X1 vs the CX-5, at the end of the day, would the CX-5 come out cheaper than the X1? Do you really get that much more value for diesel than premium? I'm not an expert on engines, but from a performance perspective, I had read that in general, diesels are not as "peppy" ? Or has technology gotten to the point where diesel engines are now on-par with turbo? Just wondering! Thanks, Vince. |
Appreciate
0
|
02-08-2013, 08:35 AM | #13 | |
Second Lieutenant
8
Rep 234
Posts |
Quote:
As a rule, diesels are low HP, high torque engines. They move well off the line, but they tend to lose grunt at higher RPM's. They're great for towing and stop-and-go driving, and very efficient for highway cruising at steady rpm's. VAG diesels are known to exceed their EPA highway ratings. The Mazda Skyactiv-D breaks some paradigms by using a lower compression ratio than a typical oil-burner. The result is a diesel that doesn't require exhaust after-treatment to meet emissions requirements. Lower compression ratio also means less stress on components, so lighter materials can be used, including the engine block which is made of aluminum instead of cast iron. Obviously I have not experienced it myself, but those who have claim it still has impressive torque, but maintains power at higher engine speeds making it behave more like a gasoline engine. Aside from better fuel efficiency, diesels tend to maintain their value better over time. Much of the investment put in up front can be recovered at resale, and the fuel savings is gravy. Time will tell if the Mazda diesel does the same. You also have the benefit of extended driving between fill-ups, which for me would be a huge benefit. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-08-2013, 08:48 AM | #14 |
Captain
19
Rep 619
Posts |
What he said, the Passat diesel, as much as I generally loathe VW products is a great vehicle, and not at all underpowered. The power is different, much shorter rev band and sweet spot, doesn't have the rush of power building to 7k like my I6 but you can spec a manual and look on fuelly.com- these things can touch/exceed 50mpg and crack 800 miles on a tank straight hwy. Are they fun to drive? Depends on your driving and what you consider fun, but if you do a lot of miles especially hwy miles they are very compelling.
__________________
2015 Valencia Msport X1 sdrive28i
2014 Mazda CX-5 AWD gt Was: 2009 Montego/terra 128i 6MT (ouch)...great car Last edited by Monterra; 02-08-2013 at 09:15 AM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
02-08-2013, 08:50 AM | #15 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
1163
Rep 1,548
Posts |
Quote:
Currently debating going with a 35i over the 28i since the few options I want are standard on it but I'm tracking you guys' reported fuel economy since that may be the great equalizer. I DD my Moupe spring thru fall and get around 19mpg of fun (manually calculated). I replaced my old ZJ (too many electrical/harness gremlins) that got slightly lower fuel economy than the Moupe with the MCS as a winter vehicle & hauling mule since I wanted something manual, fun, and with good gas mileage. Looking to replace the MCS, though, since I think it is overrated on all but fuel economy (these WS-60's are really making me hate the car, too). However, if people are simply judging mpg by the OBC, I and most people I know do not take that to be an accurate assessment. Actual fuel economy may be better or worse. I have never known anyone that hand crunched the #'s to be remotely near what the OBC reported.
__________________
- Jeff
bosstones' flickr |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-08-2013, 12:36 PM | #16 | |
Private
5
Rep 68
Posts |
Quote:
Vince. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|