When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I went from a 2015 TLX FWD 6 cylinder to a 2018 AWD 6 cylinder A-SPEC. Mileage in my 2015 averaged around 20 mpg, but the new 2018 is suck at 15.9 mpg. I drive the same. Only difference is the 2018 is brand new and the 2015 had about 2,000 when I bought it. Full disclosure, I have about 2,000 on my 2018 now. Any thoughts?
the '18 SHAWD weighs more. the '18 SHAWD weighs 3838lbs while the v6 paws weighs 3616lbs.
in addition to weighing more, the SHAWD is less efficient and will sap fuel.
it's useless to throw out your MPG number without throwing out your average MPH number...
these 2 numbers correlate; as driving at a slower average MPH will reflect with poor MPG
Do you live in a cold weather climate? Cold weather climate areas have switched to winter blend gas which is more volatile and can decrease mileage significantly. For example in the summer I average around 26-27 mpg in my '15 SH-AWD with hard driving mixed 50/50 highway/city. The same driving only nets me 22-23 mpg in the winter. What is the Difference between Summer- and Winter-Blend Gasoline? | AAA NewsRoom
What IDS mode do you drive in? Are you an extreme lead-foot? What PSI do you keep your tires at? Do you use the 91+ octane as recommended?
ASPEC's are rated at at least 1 mpg less than the normal counterparts due to wider tires.
Your mileage seems really low even compared to mine and I drive my car really hard.
We need to know some more information as many factors can contribute to your mileage.
the '18 SHAWD weighs more. the '18 SHAWD weighs 3838lbs while the v6 paws weighs 3616lbs.
in addition to weighing more, the SHAWD is less efficient and will sap fuel.
it's useless to throw out your MPG number without throwing out your average MPH number...
these 2 numbers correlate; as driving at a slower average MPH will reflect with poor MPG
Will put this in the pot. 24MPG 38MPH 950 Miles in city limits driving in Sport +
Wow...something sounds amiss. I get 21-22 MPG in all stop and go in city driving. In mostly highway (in hilly terrain), I get between 29-30 MPG. And, I’m not light on the right pedal application, either.
that's your problem RIGHT there.
you are sitting in traffic, lowering the average MPH...
Get on the freeway and drive with a steady foot at 55mph..or if that's too slow, go up to 65mph...and watch your Average MPH and Average MPG rise..
it's elementary, really.
if you don't believe me; check out Bear's stats...
he's averaging 38MPH and netting 24MPG.
thus why it's IMPARATIVE to include Average MPH and Average MPG
Last edited by justnspace; 12-06-2017 at 10:06 AM.
Wow...something sounds amiss. I get 21-22 MPG in all stop and go in city driving. In mostly highway (in hilly terrain), I get between 29-30 MPG. And, I’m not light on the right pedal application, either.
Take your car into the dealer.
you are missing important info..
no one knows what your city driving LOOKs like...
if you add Average MPH, which can be found in the MID, we can get a better look at what "city" is for you.
that's your problem RIGHT there.
you are sitting in traffic, lowering the average MPH...
Get on the freeway and drive with a steady foot at 55mph..or if that's too slow, go up to 65mph...and watch your Average MPH and Average MPG rise..
it's elementary, really.
if you don't believe me; check out Bear's stats...
he's averaging 38MPH and netting 24MPG.
thus why it's IMPARATIVE to include Average MPH and Average MPG
Plus I have the handycap of lugging around 370 wheel horses. Tuff fitting them all into the back seat.
Seriously average speed does matter because the gas is always running even when you are stopped, I don't use start/stop or ECON. I do use Comfort at high speed 75+MPH on the highway at cruise because it enables my top gears which are blocked in Sport+
My MPG will increase to a point around 75 MPH average to 31/32MPG before drag starts to require more pedal to maintain speed decreasing mileage. Also an unproven theory of mine is that in normal stop/start city traffic ECON hurts mileage because it takes more pedal to get moving or increase speed since is shuts off my turbos.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 12-06-2017 at 12:34 PM.
Average speed is highly important but the commute patttern as well.
I drive daily four times 11km and it takes 11 minutes each. So my avg speed is 100km/h. Make sense as I get in the highway within 1m, do 8m @ 120km/h and 2m more. But I don't get anywhere close 32-34mpg although the average speed is 100 km/h.... my commute is short, not mentioning the engine has to warm up a few minutes.
Average speed is highly important but the commute patttern as well.
I drive daily four times 11km and it takes 11 minutes each. So my avg speed is 100km/h. Make sense as I get in the highway within 1m, do 8m @ 120km/h and 2m more. But I don't get anywhere close 32-34mpg although the average speed is 100 km/h.... my commute is short, not mentioning the engine has to warm up a few minutes.
Get some turbos & drive a little faster. Actually am surprised how good the mileage is figured the 370WHP performance kit would kill the mileage.
This was my old one with the JB4 around town also at dynoed @ 370WHP @ the time I made this shot, 974 miles & expect the average speed was similar to the 38MPH I posted because it was making the same kind of runs over the same roads. City mileage dropped to 20MPG when I made some additional mods to the car.
Think Acura will help itself quite a bit when it steps up to a turbo V6.
If you think that addition of turbo will help fuel cost, *fail*, I find it utter ridiculous that tutbo-bimmerfans need to molest their cars and brag about getting 22-23mpg for 370HP on premium when Mustang w/Coyote 5.0 will get 18-19mpg for 460HP on regular. Net; about $100 difference in fuel cost. Big deal. Compare Side-by-Side
If you think that addition of turbo will help fuel cost, *fail*, I find it utter ridiculous that tutbo-bimmerfans need to molest their cars and brag about getting 22-23mpg for 370HP on premium when Mustang w/Coyote 5.0 will get 18-19mpg for 460HP on regular. Net; about $100 difference in fuel cost. Big deal. Compare Side-by-Side
it's a pretty big deal when my naturally aspirated engine that is making 120hp LESS and is netting the same fuel mileage as bear.
in other words; he has the more powerful car and gets the same gas mileage as a Honda V6..
it's a pretty big deal when my naturally aspirated engine that is making 120hp LESS and is netting the same fuel mileage as bear.
in other words; he has the more powerful car and gets the same gas mileage as a Honda V6..
Wrong, They are not getting the same mileage whatever the bear will say.
I just got a new '18 TLX V6 FWD and I was freakin out about gas mileage - only getting ~14 MPG around town. So, I decided that I needed to know what I can get on the highway. I filled up with premium gas and took a 20 mile highway trip around the beltway. I was able to hit 40 MPG average going 65 - 70 MPH. When you include the bit of driving around the town, from leaving the gas station, to pulling back into my home driveway the average is still over 35 MPG.
That's right, 40MPG and the car has only 260 miles on it - it's supposed to get better when the engine "breaks in", right?
I guess I'll stop worrying about city MPG because it's just not going to be good unless I get a hybrid or a light hatchback. I wonder what kind of city MPG I could get in a Civic Type R though?
I'm not a fan of high speed driving, well, not so much, but I do like to experience the feeling of being pushed back into my seat as a part of everyday normal driving - since I like a "peppy" car, but still want good mileage, I wonder if the ILX would have been a better choice for me than the TLX? I certainly wish I could have gotten an ILX with Honda's new 2.0T motor, I 110% want that car (that hasn't been made yet).
If you think that addition of turbo will help fuel cost, *fail*, I find it utter ridiculous that tutbo-bimmerfans need to molest their cars and brag about getting 22-23mpg for 370HP on premium when Mustang w/Coyote 5.0 will get 18-19mpg for 460HP on regular. Net; about $100 difference in fuel cost. Big deal. Compare Side-by-Side
Have a 5.0 liter 32 valve V8 COYOTE in my COBRA, love that engine. That said they do not get 460BHP on 87. The HP published number by FORD is on 93 Octane. Also the 460 number is at the crank not the wheels. Knock about 15% out of the 460 & you are looking at about 390WHP. I have dynos showing 380/390WHP for COYOTE engines out of the crate
So the extra 2 liters, the size of the base Acura TLX engine the N/A COYOTE makes an extra 30/31WHP.
I would say the 3.0 liter 24 valve I6 24 370whp BMW is looking pretty good in comparison.
If you want a strong COYOTE it has to go to forced induction. Supercharger kits will take the stock COYOTE to 700+ HP. Way more then I need in a 2200lbs car.
Fuel mileage on the lightweight COBRA is good @ 24/25MPG around town. Have never measured it over the road but the stiff gearing is no mileage maker @ 80MPH.
Also in real life there are some of us that just enjoy quick fun cars & really don't give a sh*t about fuel costs.
BTW the 440 is not molested its pure stock exactly the way BMW built it & was delivered through the Performance Center Delivery system. All I have done to the car is wash it & put 93 octane gas in it. If it was molested it would be producing over 460WHP.
The gospel according to the EPA your bible in fuel matters says EPA MPG, Premium Gasoline. Combined MPG:25. combined. city/highway. MPG. City MPG:21. city. Highway MPG:32.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 12-08-2017 at 09:58 AM.
An update with todays number since I did not show a picture before & Mr Saintor seems to think its not a valid number.
Nothing special this is the third car which has had similar numbers. I drive quickly in Sport+ so am not trying to stretch the mileage. I can't match the I4 TLX but it does hold up pretty well against the V6. Non-rush hour traffic moves along pretty good so its easier to maintain a higher speed than in a place like NYC.
One of the problems in comparing mileage is the varied locations & traffic conditions the car is driven in. To me no matter where or what you drive if the fuel cost to you personally is not onerous what difference does it make what the raw numbers are?
Also on the typical cherry picking he does looked for the worse case lowest mileage, slowest 440 the 6MT for his EPA number. My 440 is an 8AT & on the Moronery Sticker that I still have the number is 25 Combined 21City/32Highway with a five year additional fuel cost over average of five years $1750 or $350 a year. The kid in the Mustang he listed at is $3500 for 5 years or $700 a year over average. So the 440 looks to be about $350 a year better on fuel costs. Maybe a creditability issue here with Sanitor's typical cherry picking of the facts.
Seems in the past my friend was banging the drum on a $200 a year savings running cheap low 87 octane gas in these cars. Either way $100, 200 or 300 is just chump change when looking at $40K to $60K.
How is discussing about turbos and other brands' MPG going to help the OP's poor gas mileage on his TLX ... I will never undertand
the OP doesn't HAVE a poor fuel mileage problem.
he has an idle/traffic problem.
we have figured this out by comparing average MPH. His average speed is 16MPH...that correlates with his fuel mileage of 15.5MPG
furthermore; it shows that turbo cars with more power can achieve the same or even better fuel economy than the naturally aspirated TLX.
Last edited by justnspace; 12-08-2017 at 01:59 PM.
How is discussing about turbos and other brands' MPG going to help the OP's poor gas mileage on his TLX ... I will never undertand
Its a not so subtle nudge rather then sit here & be complacent with the underpowered N/A engines while the cars that the TLX used to beat hands down in the marketplace move ahead, to make some noise in a forum that ACURA marketing reads.
They have had no problem going Turbo with HONDA to stay in the game against Toyota FORD & the rest. Not only are they moving to turbos the have features in the low priced brand that you can't even get in the flagship line. Guess a lot of people are just OK with that which is something I will never understand. Don't you thinks its strange that the best performing car in the HONDA/ACURA product line for regular buyers is a freekin' CIVIC?
For $64,000 (i.e. 50% to 100% more than a 2017/2018 TLX!) I should hope you'd get some nice new technology, horsepower, and decent gas mileage from you BMW! Although, I do feel this comparison is quite off-topic. Maybe if the OP had asked to compare mileage from a variety of cars in this class of vehicle it would be applicable...but OP did not.
Perhaps the BMW or replica Cobra forums would be better place to discuss your amazing vehicles?
For $64,000 (i.e. 50% to 100% more than a 2017/2018 TLX!) I should hope you'd get some nice new technology, horsepower, and decent gas mileage from you BMW! Although, I do feel this comparison is quite off-topic. Maybe if the OP had asked to compare mileage from a variety of cars in this class of vehicle it would be applicable...but OP did not.
Perhaps the BMW or replica Cobra forums would be better place to discuss your amazing vehicles?
Respectfully disagree. The comparison is a 3.5 liter N/A vs a 3.0 liter turbo. Does not matter whos car they are in they are just hunks of metal designed to do the same thing & most have similar costs to put together. The Mustang that Saintor listed will run with my 440 & is a lot less expensive at $35K base, so is the Camaro.
There are any number of cars running 3.0 or less displacement the are easily out producing the 3.5N/A in the TLX. I use mine because I have good records for actual fuel use, dyno runs for actual horsepower, EPA sticker for comparison values etc to back up my statements when one of the posters here said that no one else is getting my mileage in a 440.
Price is not relevant, BMW's cost more because they have a BMW tax on it. Look what they get for a stripped 320 when anyone with 320 money & common sense would buy a maxed out ACCORD.. BMW tax, MB tax Audi tax, Lexus tax are what people pay to buy the cars. If they had different labels they would be cheaper or possibly more expensive. When you get into luxury brands the price is always more then the sum of its parts, that's why its a luxury. ACURA being priced closer to the sum of its parts makes it a value car although at the top end $45K+ I think they are dipping their toes into the luxury pool without either the label or muscle to sustain that level of pricing.
Look at HONDA's own CIVIC.The car is a 2.0 liter turbo that's reated at 303BHP. Using HONDA/ACURAA own dyno formulas the CIVIV 2.0 generates 13BHP more then the TLX 3.5 engine.
For $64,000 (i.e. 50% to 100% more than a 2017/2018 TLX!) I should hope you'd get some nice new technology, horsepower, and decent gas mileage from you BMW! Although, I do feel this comparison is quite off-topic. Maybe if the OP had asked to compare mileage from a variety of cars in this class of vehicle it would be applicable...but OP did not.
Perhaps the BMW or replica Cobra forums would be better place to discuss your amazing vehicles?
You know you can put members on ignore, right?
And to be fair, the OP didn't ask to compare fuel mileage, I asked him to, to figure out if he had a problem or not.
which he does not.
Everything else is just side chatter, you are free to join in!
the OP doesn't HAVE a poor fuel mileage problem.
he has an idle/traffic problem.
we have figured this out by comparing average MPH. His average speed is 16MPH...that correlates with his fuel mileage of 15.5MPG
Yes, that I got. My reading comprehension is not that bad.
furthermore; it shows that turbo cars with more power can achieve the same or even better fuel economy than the naturally aspirated TLX.
This is what I dont get. How does writing long posts talking about turboes and other brands mpg contribute to the thread??? Uhm off topic much?
Since we are off topic anyway:
@Bear: I dont disagree with your technical explanation. They are perfectly good. But if you want to raise hell with Acura Marketing, write to them directly. I have learned a lot from your posts. And that is you drive a BMW. It is reliable, powerful, efficient, fun, cheap to maintain and superior to any Acuras.
Sir, Acura hasnt released their 3.0t because they are not ready for whatever reason. Perhaps, they are waiting for an appropriate transmission, or its still under long term testing, or it needs some tweaking for reliablity, etc. I am sure Acura Engineering almost has a bunch of engines developed and under testing. They dont need another bad press on their engineering. Do you think at this time they should stick with a reliable V6 NA or a somewhat unreliable 3.0t?
12-05-2017, 05:01 AM
