So, owners what range are you getting ?

[frontrangeleaf]

At 80mph, my last ICE was well under 15 mpg. At 2.X miles/kWh your are doing significantly better than then the ICES flying around you.

What were you doing wrong? My Q5 gets 32-34 mpg at 80 mph. Routinely. Not a small vehicle either, well, not tiny anyway. And no, I don't drive it like a baby carriage. (It is a diesel, with an 8 speed transmission, and a rounded off profile, rather than square faced).

That's a bit of an exaggeration, unless you're referencing all the giant-sized rounded off bricks that people so covet...aka "full-sized" pickups and the like.

 

[knightmb]

At 80mph, my last ICE was well under 15 mpg. At 2.X miles/kWh your are doing significantly better than then the ICES flying around you.

What were you doing wrong? My Q5 gets 32-34 mpg at 80 mph. Routinely. Not a small vehicle either, well, not tiny anyway. And no, I don't drive it like a baby carriage.

If you are going by the dash readings, it's well know that every manufacture (including Nissan for ICE) skew those readings in favor of higher numbers and are highly inaccurate. My wife's Volkswagen did the same thing, highly skewed efficiency numbers on the dash. With the right ODB connector and software, you can measure real-time fuel use and calculate a much better estimate of fuel economy. Why this doesn't get the attention of law makers, I'll never know because it's been going on for a long time. Your Q5 is only rated 28 mpg highway, so hitting 32 to 34 mpg @ 80 mph is probably not accurate unfortunately.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

At 80mph, my last ICE was well under 15 mpg. At 2.X miles/kWh your are doing significantly better than then the ICES flying around you.

What were you doing wrong? My Q5 gets 32-34 mpg at 80 mph. Routinely. Not a small vehicle either, well, not tiny anyway. And no, I don't drive it like a baby carriage.

If you are going by the dash readings, it's well know that every manufacture (including Nissan for ICE) skew those readings in favor of higher numbers and are highly inaccurate. My wife's Volkswagen did the same thing, highly skewed efficiency numbers on the dash. With the right ODB connector and software, you can measure real-time fuel use and calculate a much better estimate of fuel economy. Why this doesn't get the attention of law makers, I'll never know because it's been going on for a long time. Your Q5 is only rated 28 mpg highway, so hitting 32 to 34 mpg @ 80 mph is probably not accurate unfortunately.

Agreed. Amazing how many people take that information as gospel w/o considering the hit to the pocketbook. The only process worth tracking or mentioning is cost per mile. I drove XX and it cost me YY in fuel to do it. Everything else is noise.

 

[DougWantsALeaf]

My 2007 Kia Sedona did 17-19mpg at 75 and around 15 when doing 80+, in which it was unstable..to be fair I didn't have much data at that speed because I didn't want to die.

 

[frontrangeleaf]

FWIW, my Q5 is rated to 31 mpg on the highway.

Can’t speak to the accuracy of the dash, but it’s close enough for our purposes here. It’s not off by 2x.

 

[knightmb]

FWIW, my Q5 is rated to 31 mpg on the highway.

Can’t speak to the accuracy of the dash, but it’s close enough for our purposes here. It’s not off by 2x.

I'm not familiar with all the version years of the Q5, so I won't say it's impossible to get the 32 to 34 mpg range, but if the one you have is rated for 31 mpg, then knowing how they arrived at that number plus what happens when you are a really driving 80 mph will tell you that the dash is actually way off.
To start, how does the EPA calculator that mileage.

The "city" program is designed to replicate an urban rush-hour driving experience in which the vehicle is started with the engine cold and is driven in stop-and-go traffic with frequent idling. The car or truck is driven for 11 miles and makes 23 stops over the course of 31 minutes, with an average speed of 20 mph and a top speed of 56 mph. The "highway" program, on the other hand, is created to emulate rural and interstate freeway driving with a warmed-up engine, making no stops (both of which ensure maximum fuel economy). The vehicle is driven for 10 miles over a period of 12.5 minutes with an average speed of 48 mph and a top speed of 60 mph. Both fuel economy tests are performed with the vehicle's air conditioning and other accessories turned off.

So your 31 mpg was calculated at 60 mph. At 80 mph, you lose 16% more mileage (this is napkin math by the way, for a car, not for your exact vehicle), so if a 16% loss of mileage @ 80 mph is around 26 mpg (in a perfect situation of no wind, no AC, flat road, perfect tires, etc), then getting a dash reading of 32 to 34 mpg (which is higher than the actual highway rating, so that should raise a red flag before even getting into the math) would mean your readings are off by 6 to 8 mpg. That means your dash is off by +15%, but the EPA allows this on purpose as they give manufactures a "margin of error" plus or minus to use.

So what do manufactures do with that "margin of error"? You guessed it, they put it into the mileage readings on the dash in their favor and avoid any lawsuits and government action. :lol: You gotta love politicians!

 

[frontrangeleaf]

FWIW, my Q5 is rated to 31 mpg on the highway.

Can’t speak to the accuracy of the dash, but it’s close enough for our purposes here. It’s not off by 2x.

I'm not familiar with all the version years of the Q5, so I won't say it's impossible to get the 32 to 34 mpg range, but if the one you have is rated for 31 mpg, then knowing how they arrived at that number plus what happens when you are a really driving 80 mph will tell you that the dash is actually way off.
To start, how does the EPA calculator that mileage.

The "city" program is designed to replicate an urban rush-hour driving experience in which the vehicle is started with the engine cold and is driven in stop-and-go traffic with frequent idling. The car or truck is driven for 11 miles and makes 23 stops over the course of 31 minutes, with an average speed of 20 mph and a top speed of 56 mph. The "highway" program, on the other hand, is created to emulate rural and interstate freeway driving with a warmed-up engine, making no stops (both of which ensure maximum fuel economy). The vehicle is driven for 10 miles over a period of 12.5 minutes with an average speed of 48 mph and a top speed of 60 mph. Both fuel economy tests are performed with the vehicle's air conditioning and other accessories turned off.

So your 31 mpg was calculated at 60 mph. At 80 mph, you lose 16% more mileage (this is napkin math by the way, for a car, not for your exact vehicle), so if a 16% loss of mileage @ 80 mph is around 26 mpg (in a perfect situation of no wind, no AC, flat road, perfect tires, etc), then getting a dash reading of 32 to 34 mpg (which is higher than the actual highway rating, so that should raise a red flag before even getting into the math) would mean your readings are off by 6 to 8 mpg. That means your dash is off by +15%, but the EPA allows this on purpose as they give manufactures a "margin of error" plus or minus to use.

So what do manufactures do with that "margin of error"? You guessed it, they put it into the mileage readings on the dash in their favor and avoid any lawsuits and government action. :lol: You gotta love politicians!

Thanks for taking the time to explain all that. Much appreciated. So actual in my case would somewhere in the mid-20's then. That's not too surprising. I'm not driving a Prius. This is a relatively tall car.

In my view, every vehicle is a compromise. The question that ultimately matters more than any other is fitness for purpose. We bought the Q to do certain things that our other cars can't do, or wouldn't do well. Nowadays, two of our vehicles are specialists in a sense, leaving the Q to pick up everything else, towing and cross-country travel being at the top of its list. It's very good for what we use it for. Just like the Leaf, and the Z.

 

[knightmb]

Thanks for taking the time to explain all that. Much appreciated. So actual in my case would somewhere in the mid-20's then. That's not too surprising. I'm not driving a Prius. This is a relatively tall car.

In my view, every vehicle is a compromise. The question that ultimately matters more than any other is fitness for purpose. We bought the Q to do certain things that our other cars can't do, or wouldn't do well. Nowadays, two of our vehicles are specialists in a sense, leaving the Q to pick up everything else, towing and cross-country travel being at the top of its list. It's very good for what we use it for. Just like the Leaf, and the Z.

I agree, you have the added advantage that gas stations are everywhere and it's quick to fill it up. So driving @ 80 mph is only going to cost a little more money and time at the gas pump, so you don't worry about it. It's just a shame that manufactures are taking the good faith "margin of error" and giving people a warm and fuzzy about their fuel economy when it's not quite correct. If you were driving your Q5 and it was showing 26 to 28 mpg (which is still good given the size of the vehicle as not too long ago the same vehicle size might be only getting half that), you would have some mental feelings of being cheated when the sticker showed 31 mpg. I had that same feeling over +25 years ago when those dash meters started to come out in the vehicles. I was driving a Buick in the 90s that would show 32 mpg (and this was a boat of a car) at +75 mph for trips across KY (+300 miles) for work related visits. It wasn't until I bragged to a "master mechanic" friend of mine of how awesome my fuel economy was on my boat car that he laughed and explained that it's well known among the mechanic breed that those numbers are way off in favor in the manufacture. That's when I started to do a little research and my own experiments to confirm that my Buick was definitely lying about the fuel economy. Then I talked with others online at forums who all noticed the same thing, no matter the manufacture, they all were in on it, even the expensive luxury brands... *sigh* :?

 

[skateguy50]

At 80mph, my last ICE was well under 15 mpg. At 2.X miles/kWh your are doing significantly better than then the ICES flying around you.

Honestly for me it was never an issue for my daily, I retired a Toyota Yaris that was stick shift and no working ac. Gas never really cost me that much and averaged 35 mpg at 80-85 mph highway driving. For me the overall cost of ownership / gas vs electric cost is still more with electric vs getting another use hathback but did the switch for the environmental impacts more than the $ saved.

My other vehicle I didn't retire yet is a 99 silverado with a v8 and gets 15 mpg around 65mph and cant safely do much more that that lol.

 

[DougWantsALeaf]

My Corolla was sub 30 above 75mph. It was also highly unstable above 75, so I rarely went above low 70s.

That said, at 60mph it would do 40mpg, which was great economy.

 

[LeftieBiker]

My Volvo 122S, with a 3 speed slushbox, no less (it was converted later) would happily cruise at 90MPH all day, and hit 115 without getting squirrelly. On bias ply tires.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

My Corolla was sub 30 above 75mph. It was also highly unstable above 75, so I rarely went above low 70s.

That said, at 60mph it would do 40mpg, which was great economy.

I had a 99 Corolla bought to support my 2011. Paid $2200 all in for it. Got it Dec 3, 2013 , gave it away a few months after getting my 2018. The "giveaway" process took a while as my first choice couldn't drive a stick. Put almost 27,000 miles on it. It was my "long distance" car for the first two years I had it when most of the miles were put on it. The last 2 years, most of the time I drove it, was to keep it from withering away. So mostly freeway, no short trips. Lifetime average 38.14 mpg.

 

[DougWantsALeaf]

My 2000 Corolla was my commuter car for years I had a 55 mile a day commute. Ifi babied it on the highway to/from the city (we lived in the city and job was in the burbs) I could get 40mpg in perfect weather. Most of the time was mid to upper 30s, at around 55-60mph. Speed limit was/is 55. And Lake Shore Drive is 40mph.

 

[LeftieBiker]

I hope that you mean MPG. I mean, I know Corollas have been kind of slow since the '90's, but...

 

[DougWantsALeaf]

fixed

 

[goldbrick]

Just FWIW, my 2021 Rav4 Prime got about 39mpg on a recent round trip from CO to IA. That was going ~75mph on I-80 most of the way. I can easily get 45mpg on my commute or around town but I'm usually in EV mode then. This is on a 'big' car that is also 4WD and has Michelin CrossClimate2 tires.

I'm sure if it was important, most manufacturers could make 'normal' cars that got 50+mpg but people seem to want (or have been convinced to want) 1) bigger and 2) more powerful cars. So the average mpg seems to be flat-lining while the speed and size of the average car increases [/rant].

 

[knightmb]

Just FWIW, my 2021 Rav4 Prime got about 39mpg on a recent round trip from CO to IA. That was going ~75mph on I-80 most of the way. I can easily get 45mpg on my commute or around town but I'm usually in EV mode then. This is on a 'big' car that is also 4WD and has Michelin CrossClimate2 tires.

I'm assuming that was all downhill?

Tennessee has great downhill drives like that from the Smokey Mountains that give you over a +7,000 ft. drop in elevation the whole way. It's fun in the Leaf because of so much coasting, you end starting with a full charge again at the bottom and 30 miles later.

 

[LeftieBiker]

Round trips that are all downhill are my favorites!

 

[knightmb]

Round trips that are all downhill are my favorites!

Good point, I just caught that. :lol:

Interesting video to go with that point:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIYLiD3wICw

 

[EatsShootsandLeafs]

2020 Leaf SV. Dash claims 100% battery capacity. I got laughably bad mileage the other night. Here is how it went:

Left garage to drive to theater. Watched three hour movie.

When we came out it was 15F ambient temps. I looked at the battery temp gauge and it was slightly into the pale blue zone (which is right of the darker blue really cold zone on the non-numeric gauge). I turned cabin heat on and drove home.

Start
51% charge with 62 estimated miles.

Drove
9 miles @ average 30-40 mph with just a few lights, no traffic.

Remaining
36% charge with 44 estimated miles

In my experience this car refuses no matter what to ever, ever, ever, estimate less than 1.2X the charge percent in remaining miles.

Note that my experience actually worked out to around 60 miles in these conditions on a full battery. Even a rounding error somewhere or accounting for non-linear charge-to-miles I am certain this car would not get over 50% of EPA range in cold conditions. Had this been on the highway, cold-soaked down to 5F it would be worse.

What's really strange to me--never seen this before, is that as the charge was dropping like at rock at one point I was telling my daughter about it and, as I was looking at the remaining charge it dropped from 46% to 41%, completely skipping the numbers between. Within a breath it dropped to 40%. It then went back up to 41% fairly quickly and then hunt around low 40's for several minutes until it started to eat down to 36%, which is when we got home.

We are likely to buy this car off lease but winter performance of these cars is really atrocious.