I averaged 44 real world mpg recently on a drive from Napa to Anaheim, but with little AC use and probably averaged 65 mph. Just wanted to throw that out as good numbers are definetly achievable.
Well that seems extremely high mpg. I have a 2024 black activ trax, 400 mile average 30.7. Your mpg readout must not be working right, or your engine is running on one cylinder. Take it back to the dealer, get it fixed. There's no way you're getting 44 mpg unless you have the motor turned off coasting down hill.
@@Djr0ss it will for a New York minute! Set the readout for 400 mile average. I get 36 or 37 mpg when the readout resets every 25 miles.. There's no way you're going to average over 34 mpg, doing a 400 mile drive with the trip odometer set for 400 mile average. General motors is not going to hold back on what gas mileage this car can achieve! Does not benefit general motors in anyway. General motors would love to brag the Trax averages 35 mpg. They would pay less penalties to the government, an the appeal of the trax would be even better!
@@Djr0ss if you're averaging 39 mpg on a 400 mile trip, you've got a special Trax! Possibly a broken mpg read out! On the window sticker general motors mpg. 28 city/ 30 average/ 32 highway! I'm sure general motors would be interested in how your Trax is averaging 39 mpg after 400 miles of driving. So they can make all the Trax they sell get 39 mpg. Not just yours!
I live in Montana, and our speed limit on the highway is 80 MPH, but I usually drive at most 85 MPH. I averaged 26 mpg. It's not great, but it's expected with higher elevation and consistently speeding.
The new Trax seems like it is a nice car for the price. The cost saving of the old 6 speed and the 3cyl seem to be decently effective, and like you mentioned a decent place to be in. Lower trims the seats seem to be a little harder though, but nice room
Hi, could you do the same test with a Buick Envista? it’s the same engine and powertrain as the trax but looks to have better Aero dynamics. I wonder how much of a difference, the body changes would make. The trax looks like it has the aerodynamics of a brick.
I suspect the older engine design(the 1.3T in the Trailblazer/Encore GX is more updated) and a 6 speed auto(higher revs at highway speeds) are the limiting factors.
@@счастье33How is this any less aerodynamic than any other vehicle in this class? It’s actually lower slung than most which would make it have less drag. This same engine is offered as the base engine in the Trailblazer and Encore Gx and is EPA rated lower than the 1.3T despite being less powerful and smaller. It’s the engine/transmission combo that’s to blame.
@@BrandonG8Man design of body and wheels. Engine and transmission are normal efficient and doesn't have many value if you go 70mph because it not required many power. It's reason why something like Jetta much more efficient than SUV in highway
@@счастье33 Didn't understand anything... I didn't compare a small sedan with a crossover. What kind of design when a 2+ ton big fat Odyssey with a big 3.5L engine has the same fuel efficiency as a crap 1.2L small crossover ? Even a 2.5L AWD Forester got better efficiency than this crap.
70 miles per hour is not in the sweet spot for good mileage.. that was your first mistake. The sweet spot is about 60 miles per hr or 95 km/h also 33mpg is about 7.1 liters per 100kms and that is what my current car gets. If i got 60mph or 95 kms i get 6.5 liters per 100kms or 36mpg
I'm not looking for a sweet spot for good mileage. I'm trying to see how a car performs at average American highway speeds. You know what speed is the best for saving fuel? 0.
@@DailyMotorI always like your MPG Hwy tests, because this is what most Americans consider Highway miles, not your typical 55 mph backroad. If anything, I think your test proves the EPA needs to dramatically change their testing methods and have 3 ratings. City speeds 25-35 mph, regular hwy 55-60 mph, and interstate hwy 70-75 mph. This is what everyday Americans drive.
For such a tiny engine and being 3 cylinder only, the fuel economy is just ok. A bigger 4 cylinder with more power from every other manufacturer gets you the same mpg as well. So my question is, what benefits does this tiny engine provide?? other than just being cheaper to produce for GM
I could match that number in my Cutlass Cieras with V6s and my Saab 900S (non-turbo). Nothing impressive these days with the new tiny turbo aka throw away engines.
Small turbos are always nice and quiet. Also do great in the cool thin air at altitude. 33mpg still isn't that bad, but its because the 1.2T is the poop version, the 1.3T is better and would probably do better with the CVT from the Trailblazer.
You're mistaken, its not that 33mpg is bad for the class, its that the Odyssey is very good for the class. Its not just a regular 3.5L, on the highway the Odyssey operates as a 3-cylinder 1.75L naturally aspirated engine and weight doesn't really matter like in stop and go its really just aerodynamics and a minivan is lower and longer which helps with drag. Compare this with a Nissan Kicks or Hyundai Venue or Kia Soul, none of those do any better. @@Eugen-E
@@BoopSnoot No )) there are a lot of bigger crossovers with bigger engines and AWD that have way better fuel efficiency than this thing. 33mpg is not bad, it's VERY bad for the class. The new BMW X1 23i got 40mpg. In reality cylinder deactivation does not make much difference. And Odyssey is way bigger (aerodynamic drag bigger because of the bigger frontal area) and has 4600lbs and the weight also matters. Try to pull something with a bicycle with constant speed and then pull something heavier and you will feel the difference.
I can't tell if you're just pretending to be slow? Weight does not matter for steady state cruising, do you understand how trains work? More expensive vehicles can have more advanced powertrains. This isn't rocket science. The similar size Hyundai Venue is 33mpg highway with a much less torquey engine. Stop pretending to be a smooth brain and wasting people's time. @@Eugen-E
Not worth it since there will be more issues with the turbo, and engine with boost. A 4 cylinder gets the same mpg but much more reliable in the long run. 2300 rpm at 72mph is fast compared to a 4 cylinder.
@@Orangematz seriously? What's difference between when you go in supermarket?🤣 Yes, Subaru more comfortable, more efficient, more more spacious... P.s. by the side, legacy has AWD system. People which pay for such "suv" more money are so stupid...
I averaged 44 real world mpg recently on a drive from Napa to Anaheim, but with little AC use and probably averaged 65 mph. Just wanted to throw that out as good numbers are definetly achievable.
Well that seems extremely high mpg. I have a 2024 black activ trax, 400 mile average 30.7.
Your mpg readout must not be working right, or your engine is running on one cylinder.
Take it back to the dealer, get it fixed.
There's no way you're getting 44 mpg unless you have the motor turned off coasting down hill.
Well I've gotten 39mpg on my activ. And I've read a few other posts of others getting similar numbers
@@Djr0ss it will for a New York minute! Set the readout for 400 mile average. I get 36 or 37 mpg when the readout resets every 25 miles..
There's no way you're going to average over 34 mpg, doing a 400 mile drive with the trip odometer set for 400 mile average.
General motors is not going to hold back on what gas mileage this car can achieve! Does not benefit general motors in anyway.
General motors would love to brag the Trax averages 35 mpg.
They would pay less penalties to the government, an the appeal of the trax would be even better!
That is what i have it set to, I'm in Canada so it's set to 500km. Anyways all good enjoy!
@@Djr0ss if you're averaging 39 mpg on a 400 mile trip, you've got a special Trax!
Possibly a broken mpg read out! On the window sticker general motors mpg.
28 city/ 30 average/ 32 highway!
I'm sure general motors would be interested in how your Trax is averaging 39 mpg after 400 miles of driving. So they can make all the Trax they sell get 39 mpg. Not just yours!
We get about 35 in our LT. Thought provoking and mesmerizing music. Thank you.
These vehicles are being tested with liw mileage. Better acceleration and mpg will be realized once they get a few thousand miles on them.
I live in Montana, and our speed limit on the highway is 80 MPH, but I usually drive at most 85 MPH. I averaged 26 mpg. It's not great, but it's expected with higher elevation and consistently speeding.
I’ve heard of 40 mpg without running the ac of course I’ve also seen these go for 18k new which is an awesome price in my opinion.
The new Trax seems like it is a nice car for the price. The cost saving of the old 6 speed and the 3cyl seem to be decently effective, and like you mentioned a decent place to be in. Lower trims the seats seem to be a little harder though, but nice room
Hi, could you do the same test with a Buick Envista? it’s the same engine and powertrain as the trax but looks to have better Aero dynamics. I wonder how much of a difference, the body changes would make. The trax looks like it has the aerodynamics of a brick.
I suspect the older engine design(the 1.3T in the Trailblazer/Encore GX is more updated) and a 6 speed auto(higher revs at highway speeds) are the limiting factors.
Not... Not very good aerodynamic, bad wheels... It's the main reasons.
@@счастье33How is this any less aerodynamic than any other vehicle in this class? It’s actually lower slung than most which would make it have less drag. This same engine is offered as the base engine in the Trailblazer and Encore Gx and is EPA rated lower than the 1.3T despite being less powerful and smaller. It’s the engine/transmission combo that’s to blame.
@@счастье33He also got 33mpg when he tested the 4600lbs Honda Odyssey 3.5L ))))
@@BrandonG8Man design of body and wheels. Engine and transmission are normal efficient and doesn't have many value if you go 70mph because it not required many power. It's reason why something like Jetta much more efficient than SUV in highway
@@счастье33 Didn't understand anything...
I didn't compare a small sedan with a crossover. What kind of design when a 2+ ton big fat Odyssey with a big 3.5L engine has the same fuel efficiency as a crap 1.2L small crossover ?
Even a 2.5L AWD Forester got better efficiency than this crap.
The active noise canceling must not work on a mic as it actually has one of the louder back ground noise level I've heard on one of your drives
Charlie, Does this have the fold-forward front passenger seat?
Its definitely fuel efficient. I still have gas in mines from when i 1st purchased it two days ago. But I do have the Activ trim so idk.
I have the activ aswell and got 39mpg on the hwy. Just sips fuel, definitely notice a difference in the city this but zero complaints
I guess because my perspective is a 15mpg combined 2007 Trailblazer with the 4.2L but like 32-ish mpg highway would be huuuuuuge for me lmao
I have an envoy xl with an average of 12-14 with the 4.2 and would kill for 32😂
Lane departure is the button by the gear
70 miles per hour is not in the sweet spot for good mileage.. that was your first mistake. The sweet spot is about 60 miles per hr or 95 km/h also 33mpg is about 7.1 liters per 100kms and that is what my current car gets. If i got 60mph or 95 kms i get 6.5 liters per 100kms or 36mpg
I'm not looking for a sweet spot for good mileage. I'm trying to see how a car performs at average American highway speeds. You know what speed is the best for saving fuel? 0.
@@DailyMotorI always like your MPG Hwy tests, because this is what most Americans consider Highway miles, not your typical 55 mph backroad. If anything, I think your test proves the EPA needs to dramatically change their testing methods and have 3 ratings. City speeds 25-35 mph, regular hwy 55-60 mph, and interstate hwy 70-75 mph. This is what everyday Americans drive.
For such a tiny engine and being 3 cylinder only, the fuel economy is just ok. A bigger 4 cylinder with more power from every other manufacturer gets you the same mpg as well. So my question is, what benefits does this tiny engine provide?? other than just being cheaper to produce for GM
Just the last part
Cheaper and better emissions. Smaller displacement engines will always have better emissions
No, this is not even ok. A 2.5L AWD Forester had 35mpg. A 4600lb Honda Odyssey 3.5L had 33mpg )))
Qualified as a LEV
For a tiny 1.2 L 3-cyl 33 mpg is really bad. Just research engines by Mazda, Toyota or Honda are far more efficients
I could match that number in my Cutlass Cieras with V6s and my Saab 900S (non-turbo). Nothing impressive these days with the new tiny turbo aka throw away engines.
Small turbos are always nice and quiet. Also do great in the cool thin air at altitude. 33mpg still isn't that bad, but its because the 1.2T is the poop version, the 1.3T is better and would probably do better with the CVT from the Trailblazer.
33mpg for this type of car is very bad. He tested a 4600lb Honda Odyssey 3.5L and also got 33mpg...
You're mistaken, its not that 33mpg is bad for the class, its that the Odyssey is very good for the class. Its not just a regular 3.5L, on the highway the Odyssey operates as a 3-cylinder 1.75L naturally aspirated engine and weight doesn't really matter like in stop and go its really just aerodynamics and a minivan is lower and longer which helps with drag. Compare this with a Nissan Kicks or Hyundai Venue or Kia Soul, none of those do any better. @@Eugen-E
@@BoopSnoot No )) there are a lot of bigger crossovers with bigger engines and AWD that have way better fuel efficiency than this thing. 33mpg is not bad, it's VERY bad for the class. The new BMW X1 23i got 40mpg.
In reality cylinder deactivation does not make much difference. And Odyssey is way bigger (aerodynamic drag bigger because of the bigger frontal area) and has 4600lbs and the weight also matters. Try to pull something with a bicycle with constant speed and then pull something heavier and you will feel the difference.
I can't tell if you're just pretending to be slow? Weight does not matter for steady state cruising, do you understand how trains work? More expensive vehicles can have more advanced powertrains. This isn't rocket science. The similar size Hyundai Venue is 33mpg highway with a much less torquey engine. Stop pretending to be a smooth brain and wasting people's time. @@Eugen-E
The BMW has a rating of 25 city/34 highway/ 28 combined.
well coming from an "eco boost" turd of a Ford I will take 32mpg all day long.
3.7 gallons was $20 tf ☠️
Not worth it since there will be more issues with the turbo, and engine with boost. A 4 cylinder gets the same mpg but much more reliable in the long run. 2300 rpm at 72mph is fast compared to a 4 cylinder.
Those numbers are manipulated and not consistent long term. The more you drive the lower it'll be.
It's stupid to buy this car if it is not the base trim. Base Subaru legacy costs less money and it's day and night compare this.
The Legacy is also not an SUV.
@@OrangematzI wouldn’t consider the trax an suv. It’s a hatch
@@Orangematz seriously? What's difference between when you go in supermarket?🤣 Yes, Subaru more comfortable, more efficient, more more spacious... P.s. by the side, legacy has AWD system.
People which pay for such "suv" more money are so stupid...
Subaru Legacy is way more money than the Trax
@@Aymcana no