Air temperature is one of many factors affecting fuel economy. This can be due to a different winter gas formula, warming up the car longer, tire pressure dropping, and less combustion efficiency. Plus the KO3 tires weigh 19.5 lbs more each than the stock Yokos. Temperature probably doesn't put much measurable strain on the battery.
About LC Gas Efficiency
- Thread starter Marinna
- Start date
I don’t know what to tell you, but I would only go up 2 PSI at a time (based on other vehicles and my LC FE). My Michelins were down to 30 psi, and that cost me 2.5 mpg in fuel economy.
I was wondering about this and was wondering if any vehicles have a way to disable the turbo. Ya know, grandma mode -- just live with that that little 4 cylinder can do without turbo. Probably annoying on hills but maybe good enough in some cases.
Hmmnn, that seems counter intuitive to the purpose of the turbo. If you disable it, I would expect it to simply reduce the horsepower significantly and get worse fuel efficiency.
On my recent trip bay area -> pismo beach dunes -> death valley -> tahoe, with ~100 miles offroad, cold weather, snow and heavy Wildpeak AT4W SL I got ~19MPG average. I think it's OK 
I use "Normal" drive mode.
I use "Normal" drive mode.
One thing I've noticed pretty consistently is the LC absolutely hate short trips. I'm lucky to get 15mpg most mornings on my trip to work(less than 6 miles). It seems like it needs at least a 20 mile trip to get 18-20mpg
Certainly get less horsepower, yes. Probably rather disappointing sluggish performance. But perhaps better fuel economy. Just curious.
If you drive very conservatively, you might see a negligible improvement in MPG.
The energy required to accelerate a car and maintain speed is essentially fixed, and fuel contains a set amount of energy. Therefore, disabling the turbo wouldn't significantly improve MPG, as you would still need a similar amount of fuel to perform the same work. In fact, engines with higher compression ratios have better thermal efficiency, so disabling the turbo could actually hurt MPG for more aggressive driving (as turbocharged engine deliver power more efficiently).
Choosing a smaller turbocharged engine over a larger naturally aspirated engine makes sense because the turbo engine has higher thermal efficiency, less internal resistance, and lower fuel consumption at idle. However, these benefits diminish if we compare forced induction and NA versions of the same engine.
Mine is still stock and I actually drove down the five last week. I averaged 17 mpg on the entire trip. I probably averaged around 78 mph. However once I got to the desert, I started getting 21 mpg but that was more mixed driving.
Completely agree. When I had a WRX I really noticed that if I drove it carefully I'd get the MPGs one would expect from a small efficient 4 cylinder engine, and when I drove it like a mad man I'd get worse mileage than my old V8 Mustang.
YMMV.
I pulled the spreadsheet either from this thread or another and just tracked a 1400 mile trip. What I found was if I kept it at 76mph or less, my mileage improved by 3mpg. Moreover, I got better mileage the 200 miles I drove in town when I got there (4 mpg improvement) than I did on the highway. I'm not a super easy driver but I also rarely put my foot in it.
Good thread. Thank you all for your input. I'm pumping up my tires after reading this thread.
Ive been super happy about my mileage lately. After 4500 miles of analyzing driving patterns and MPG, I have turned my dash to other displays and havent looked at MPG at all. I fill it up when it is empty and go again. Happiest I have been with MPG since I bought it.
