[lesanek]

Many folks have NO idea how MPG works. The digital readout is nice but is only an opinion. The digital readout only looks at the Odometer (almost all are flawed and inaccurate) divided by a rough reading of fuel burn. The following will give you a 100% accurate reading of your gas milage.

1) First off. odometers are all over the board. Have you seen the mile markers on the side of interstates? Next trip (longer the better), note your odometer reading down to the nearest tenth (if you want to be anal like me, you'll even estimate the 1/100th of a mile in between ticks of the 1/10th. Write that mileage reading along with the corresponding mile marker down on paper. Department of Trans. says the mile markers are exact. Now drive as many miles as possible trying not to change lanes any more than needed, and of course don't exit the freeway. You'll find at the end of the test that your readings will be off some. (I've never had a car that was exact). Most of my tests show that the odometer shows less miles than the actual mile markers by 1-2%. Let's say that your odometer clocks 98.45101 miles for 100-mile markers. That will give you a correction factor of 101.5744% (If your odometer shows 100.87 miles for 100-mile markers, your factor would be 99.1375%).

2) Now the second biggest flaw is fuel consumed. Each tank is a good test, 10 miles to the grocery store and back is not. Take a ledger that you'll keep in the glove box. Have several columns. I do mine like this... A check register from the bank is my go-to. I'll use the factor above (101.5744%). Line 1-3 are for weekly fill ups, and you have to fill up, and fill ups have to be consistent, not just when the nozzle shuts off. I try to top off each time. If you don't fill up, insert NF (not full) in the MPG column and add that entire line to the next fill up. The numbers are only as accurate as the numbers inserted. The last row would be your page total which should give you a grand total of ~ 7-8000 miles in a check register. For purposes here, it is just three fill ups but will give you an idea. The key numbers here are the odometer (A) total = 1,355.5 X factor of 101.5744%=1,376.8409 actual miles driven, divided by 55.337 gallons = 24.881018 MPG ----NOTE: If the odometer error correction was not used, the MPG would have calculated 24.495364. I know this sounds small, but over the course of 100,000 miles the error becomes huge. As tire wear moves on - or tire replacement occurs, you will have to update your correction factor. If I drive multiple states on multiple interstates, I will do a meld of mileage tests to come up with my correction factor. Twice a year is a good goal. I also tally the average price paid per gallon on the bottom of each sheet. I always use Odometer (A) as my miles driven since fill up. After several months you'll actually get to know the car so well that the gas suage is a backup to what you know you've burned and how many gallons are remaining. I've found that all odometer readings seem to match the car total mileage Odometer, but they give you the added 1/10 tick.

Price per gallon	Date	gas facility	odometer (A)	Odometer car	Gallons	$ Spent	MPG
2.649	8/1/23	Costco Spirit Lake	403.8	9607	18.104	47.96	22.655624
2.749	8/6/23	Costco Spirit Lake	453.1	10060	19.144	52.63	24.040618
2.599	8/21/23	Casey Estherville	498.6	10559	18.089	47.01	27.997675
2.6672931 (Average)			1355.5 (1376.8409)		55.337	$147.60	24.881018

I know that this is WAY OVERKILL, but I like accuracy and I like to know what things are costing, etc. People say they get a certain MPG, but in reality they have no clue what they have. Hope you enjoy.

The force is strong in this one 🤣🤣

 

[Steve70]

The force is strong in this one 🤣🤣

@aLf Everything you stated may be 100% accurate, but they're all relative to every vehicle so it becomes a wash.

@Titanrx8 and @Jim_in_PA I won't say you're not right, but my experience is different. I think turbos are considered more efficient than superchargers? Our supercharged 707 HP / 4500 pound car easily beats it's EPA rating and that's driving normally..no coaxing of mpgs..and sticking my foot in it once in a while. (accerelating faster many times than the Ascent is capable of) It would likely get 29.5 mpg if driven between 35 and 55 mph as noted somewhere in here. It's rated for 22 and easily obtains it. ( I have gotten 27 mpg at 62 MPH)...everything is hand calculated

A think that Fuelly is a sound source, but could also be a littel skewed depending on where the majority of the input comes from. Of course, that's all relative too. I mention it because the Hellcat input there is mostly not close to what we get.

I still agree with those that say the Ascent struggles a tad more to get it's rating than most any other vehicle we've had besides the Honda RLs

Speaking of The Force: It is quite strong in this one. 2.4L twin screw blower 600RWHP /636 RWTQ. 126K miles and counting..all our miles. 2000 RT/10. I might add that bone stock the EPA rating on this car was 12 and 21 MPG in 2000. We could get 24 plus MPG at 77 mph and 14 plus in town. ...Heavily modified, and with a 3.45 rear gear instead of the stock 3.07, we still get 20-21 MPG at 77 mph (7 over)

 

[DocRock]

I suppose we can debate fuel mileage issues ad nauseam if we want to.

Just a couple observations:

1) Fuelly, as a self-reported source, is notoriously unreliable. Just click through the self-reported data and you will see numerous obvious errors. Just as an example, one 2023 Ascent owner has reported MPGs ranging from the low 20s to more than 70!

2) Do what I do. Download the "Road Trip MPG Lite" app to your smartphone. It's free. On every fillup, all you have to do is note your odometer reading, the number of gallons pumped and the cost per gallon. The app does the rest. Now, there is variability among different gas pumps as to when the pump "clicks off" as a full tank. But those differences even out over several refuelings. For example, on a recent refuel, the computed MPG was much higher than I knew it should have been. That corrected itself on the next refuel which resulted in a calculated MPG lower than it should have been. BTW, I have found that the pumps at our local Costco are the most consistent.

3) I use Waze as my nav app. Once I have entered the destination and selected the route I am going to take, Waze calculates the total distance to my destination. I have found it to be extremely accurate when compared to my car's odometer. One trip we take frequently (and always follow the same route) is computed as 217 miles by Waze. The odometers on both my car and my wife's car show that same mileage when we reach our destination.

4) While many factors affect MPG, I suspect driving style is a main factor. On my return home yesterday, there was an Interstate construction zone that was 10 miles in length. The posted speed limit: 50 MPH. I, as always, positioned myself in the right lane and drove at 50 the whole length. Numerous SUVs, sedans and semis passed me doing at least 10-15 MPH above 50. Some even flipped me off or honked their horns as they zipped by me. I never passed anyone. So, don't tell me most drivers are really concerned about the MPGs they are getting.

 

[Jim_in_PA]

I won't say you're not right, but my experience is different. I think turbos are considered more efficient than superchargers?

Yes, they are efficient in the sense that they allow what would otherwise be a "too small" powerplant to develop the necessary oomph to get things moving and accelerate strongly when necessary. The "real efficiency" comes when you are able to cruise along without the turbo boost, however. That's why driving conditions and driving style contribute a lot to the fuel economy experience with a vehicle like this. I think there could be some more work done to help smooth things out for Ascent drivers...I will note that I'm having a smoother driving experience with my new MY23 over what was already a good experience with the MY19. Even at only 550 miles, I'm getting close to the same 18 mpg performance with my local driving that I was with the MY19...a hair less because I haven't been doing many shopping trips that add more cruising time, but not by much. Time will tell...

 

[Titanrx8]

Just as an example, one 2023 Ascent owner has reported MPGs ranging from the low 20s to more than 70!

Woops

While many factors affect MPG, I suspect driving style is a main factor.

For any given vehicle driving style, length and speed of trips and state of vehicle maintenance (tire pressure, alignment etc) are going to impact mileage.

don't tell me most drivers are really concerned about the MPGs they are getting.

And most drivers will also tell you that they have excellent safe driving habits.

 

[Titanrx8]

@Steve70
Do you mean efficient as the net mileage they obtain? Or mechanically? As far as mechanically, it's a design decision as to which Rube Goldberg do you want to engineer around? Turbos and superchargers both use power to add power. The turbo is an obstruction in the way of smooth air intake and exhaust. Superchargers take power off the crankshaft like every other belt driven accessory (even electric superchargers are belt dependent indirectly via the alternator).

As a machine, it's possible to design either well or poorly. Ultimately a supercharger is more predictable because it's possible to add boost from nearly 0 rpms depending on pulley ratios or electric drive programming. A turbo is very dependent on throttle angle because exhaust out cannot exceed air in making turbo behavior less predictable so likely less efficient.

 

[Steve70]

@Titanrx8 I was working off the comments above saying that the turbo on the Ascent could possibly hinder good economy....yet some reading now says turbos are a fair bit more economical than SCs....and therefore should be able to obtain good mpg without coaxing them out. Our OEM Hellcat still easily beats it's EPA rating even though needing 80 of its HP to light up the 2.4L blower.

We've only owned one other turbo car. A 1982 3 door SAAB 2.0L turbo...non intercooled. (bought it with 66K miles in 1985) It too, beat its EPA rating running it more aggressively than I do the Ascent.

The SC Viper above crosses 600 pounds to the back wheels at 2350 RPM and stays flat most of the rest of the way up.

While gas is still in the mix, I think it safe to say that small displacement engines and turbos (not SC) for the induction are the way most OEMs have gone, and have done so for economy, efficiency, and waste gas reduction.

 

[madtowner]

I've been tracking with Fuelly (profile) for 1,300 miles (5 fuel ups) and wanted to report back. Once kids' school started after Labor Day, city driving increased, and we are now getting 17 on average, while still driving to maximize fuel economy. The car is now at 3K, so I think this is what we'll be seeing in the long run.

 

[bdjfywi4$]

@aLf Our supercharged 707 HP / 4500 pound car easily ...

Is it AWD like the Subie? There is a AWD penalty on fuel economy so when we compare the Subie to our "other" cars, we should keep that in mind.

 

[Steve70]

Is it AWD like the Subie? There is a AWD penalty on fuel economy so when we compare the Subie to our "other" cars, we should keep that in mind.

No, it's not. It is somewhat an apples to oranges comparison. I mention it because of the engine disparity. It's huge. The SC is the same displacement as the Ascent engine and the weight is almost the same. In addition it takes about 80 HP just to run the blower.. That's about 30% of the HP that the Ascent has to work with

In some manner of comparison, I will say that that I routinely accelerate with the HC at what would be WOT in the Ascent. The car has never left the garage without a tire turning somewhere on the route and yet returns amazing mileage for the beast it is.. easily surpassing EPA ratings if driving it like I do the Ascent...and equaling them with some right foot pedal play.

Our 300S AWD (same platform) would be a more apt comparison. It had no trouble hitting it's highway EPA right out of the box (my driving methods) with a larger 6 cylinder engine. I think it mostly due to the 8 speed tranny gearing and FDR.

I completely accept what our Ascent gets... and that it's a big box breaking big wind. It's just the furthest from attaining the EPA rating of any vehicle we've had the last many years. I admit to this being our 1st SUV.

As an aside... We've got three days left on our western national park trip. We rented a Nissan Altima in Las Vegas on the 13th and will have put about 3200 miles on it when we drop it off in Bozeman, MT. It has performed very admirably in the mpg dep't. My driving methods don't change. I run 7 over. We've been up and down mountains, idling through national parks, plugged up for an hour in Portland rush hour traffic, and more. The last tank fill today in northern MT yielded 37.1 mpg running 70 to 75 mph. I'll check the overall mileage Thursday when we drop it off.

The cost has never been a concern with the Ascent. It's the fact you have to work some to get the EPA. The only other vehicles that struggled as much were the two Honda RLs we had... Especially the 08. Our 23 Ascent has yet to yield better than EPA at 70 mph.... But at almost 12K miles it's getting better.

Our 300S AWD could hit 30 mpg at 70. It was rated at 27 if I remember right. The HC too easily hits its EPA rating. That's the issue.. The Ascent needs some massaging to accomplish the same

 

[wurich]

completed a trip in our 21 ascent in late October from Saint Louis to Valdosta to Orlando to Disneyworld, and registered 27-28MPG @ 65-73MPH and 24-35MPG at 80-83MPH south Georgia, N FLA, I75 flat land, even at 83 I was passed every minute or two by those doing 95+, even though Florida state police were quite active. Very pleased with the Ascent for the road trip.

 

[wurich]

correction 24-25MPG at 80-83MPH ,

 

[MJ_Alexander]

Just thinking.......
If you drive 100 Miles 80 m/h. You will get there faster with bad gas mileage.
Then you drive 100 Miles at 60 m/h you get great mileage.
But your car will run longer ......burning gas longer.......
So isn't that the crazy thing........😊😊

Kinda like running versus walking... it takes more energy to get there quicker.

 

[bdjfywi4$]

This is after a round trip on I-10 between Houston and San Antonio. One passenger with some luggage. The speed limits were mostly 75 and 65 MPH. When the limit was 75 MPH, I stayed at 75, which is the fastest I did. Thus on highway, it runs pretty much as advertised. My lifetime gas mileage is 16 MPG so the city driving inside the loop in Houston is a fuel economy killer with an average at about 14 MPG.

Other observations: from the instant gas mileage, I got about 28-30 MPG driving at 65 MPH, it dropped to 24-25 at 75 MPH. Since I-10 goes east and west, one way was with the wind while the other way against.

 

[Jim_in_PA]

I got about 28-30 MPG driving at 65 MPH, it dropped to 24-25 at 75 MPH

That is what I would expect from my own experience. Wind resistance combined with a "little more work" to do the higher speed drops the result a little bit. With the MY19 Touring, my highway average was about 26.5 overall, but with some tank results closer to 28. I have not done any travel yet with the MY23 Touring but I anticipate similar performance given how I drive.

 

[Ceapea]

I recently bought my 22 Ascent Premium. My last new car was a 2008 Dakota. NO technology compared to the Ascent. Anyway, I bought it with just over 15k on it. The previous owner never reset trip B which leaves the average mileage for that non reset session, there. While going thru the convoluted manual(s), checking for all the hidden features of the vehicle, I learned about Trip B, and had found the overall (literally, since mile 1) mpg is 22.7.
I too, drive like “an old man.” As an incentive since I’m already driving like that, I had also installed a Progressive insurance “Snapshot” device that monitors (and immediately reports via the app) my driving habits. Slooow starts, early deceleration and combined trips (as much as possible) make for pretty good averages. Right around that overall 22.7 mentioned earlier. Though I did recently have several short trips, stop and go traffic, etc… That resulted in 20.3 overall milage. In another thread, I posted about my best mpg so far, on a ~200 mile trip, to be just under 27 mpg. I’m pretty happy so far. My Dakota was providing 13/19 mpg and my overall average was about 14.5 mpg!! That, to tow my boat a few times a year. I really wanted a capable vehicle, that would also get as good a mileage as possible when not towing. The Ascent seems to be what I was looking for. But, I haven’t towed anything with it so far…so the final story has yet to be told.

 

[Daniel Acosta]

Christmas vacation, probably a 70/30 mix of highway/city, some off roading, some slow going on ice in mountain passes. Highway speeds were mostly 75, never over 90. Very consistent mileage on our 3,000 mile trip, now at 23K miles overall.

 

[Steve70]

Just made our cross country winter trip to AZ. 2,121 miles. Average 21.64 mpg. Last year was 21.85 mpg. I had hoped for al ittle better given the car isn't new this year. We're currently at 17,450 on the clock. Great cruiser!

I've stated before. I run 7 over as a rule. In the 75 mph areas, I run 80. I would guess most of the trip is in the 73-77 mph range. The TX panhandle is 75 mph

 

[Padraic]

I have a 2020 Ascent Touring. Just completed a Maryland to Florida round trip. Just a bit over 3k miles and got 27.7 mpg. On highways (70% of total mileage), I cruise at posted speed plus maybe 5 mph. This trip I used premium which bested my previous mpg by 0.3 (on regular) on similar trips. I use cruise control almost exclusively on the highway. I am not an aggressive (no jackrabbit starts and stops).
I use the mpg graph to give me immediate feedback on my driving. Love to see green (lots of it)

 

[countryboyva62]

I've had my 2024 Ascent since January 27th but I traded a 2020 Outback Touring XT on on it I got better than spec milage on my Outback and so far doing well with the Ascent. The main tool I use the adaptive cruise control and have the resume set on ECO.