2015 Outback MPG Thread - Page 86 - Subaru Outback - Subaru Outback Forums
 428Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 1.33 average.
post #851 of 1751 (permalink) Old 03-17-2015, 11:25 PM
Registered User
 
EaglexPDX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: PDX
Car: 2015 Legacy Premium, Eyesight
Posts: 1,355
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by SubiesSince99 View Post
We are talking about whether SOME (maybe/likely not all) '15 Outbacks have an issue that can not be blamed on those WORST CASE scenarios.
I don't think we've seen a single case where the car had some kind of mechanical or computer issue. No one has taken a car to the dealer and demonstrated an acutal problem with the car. In every case the car can make the EPA numbers but some people have not been able to do it.

EaglexPDX is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #852 of 1751 (permalink) Old 03-17-2015, 11:45 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: NorCal
Car: 2015 outback limited 2006 WRX STi
Posts: 236
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Something I left out of my data. Most of my drive is at sea level to 50' with a climb to 280' feet just before my house.

Rekcah is offline  
post #853 of 1751 (permalink) Old 03-18-2015, 12:35 AM
Registered User
 
SubiesSince99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Western VA mountains
Car: GOLDILOCKS '15 Outback Limited 2.5i Tungsten; '10 Outback 2.5i Limited, CVT, Cypress Green 150K miles; '99 Forester S, 247K miles
Posts: 375
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by zim2dive View Post
One thing to understand about the trip computers in the VW Passats which I owned...

there were *3* trip computers...
...
the point being, that it was very easy to track 3 levels of MPGs...

a) this trip (ie. how did I do on *THIS* commute, *THIS* morning)
b) TripA... how did I do on *THIS* tank of gas
c) TripB.. how have I done for a longer period of time (ie. 1000's of miles)

so it was very easy to get at this data.


Point b) THIS TANK is a perfectly legitimate way of getting a GENERAL assessment of how things are going, though obviously we must concede that irregularities and eccentricities will occur. Zim , you are (as I am) rather hyper aware of what exactly went into burning that tank, so we already usually know the why's involved.

Point c) says it all. It's the sum total, and after THOUSANDS of miles, unless we have had significant lifestyle changes or driving habits have radically changed or (and I'll admit it does have impact) the weather is radically colder than what we ourselves have lived and driven through before, that resulting number IS MEANINGFUL and does point toward an issue when it is significantly out of line.
You know it. I know it. Some here don't know it, and some here aren't sure. I understand that, (mostly.)

I can't verify your claims, Zim, any more than you can mine, but I totally believe them based on the things you've said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by grimsurfer View Post
So collect and post detailed data of your 2015 OB's fuel consumption, temperature, number of stops, max speed, average speed, length(s) of journeys and we can start to figure-out what's going on...

... or don't and enjoy very little support from readers.

It is as simple as that.
Not for all of us. I think Zim has posted clearly enough that I see his point, (and feel his pain! I'm living the same story, as I said.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by fotomoto View Post
You're comparing apples to oranges. ...
Next,

Your current less than 10 mile commute is tougher on newer cars due to tightening emissions. The warmup routine is more heavily emphasized now to get the engine up to temp as quickly as possible. A cold engine is dirtier. In the winter on such a short drive, the engine will spend very little, if any, time in the optimal operating temperature zone.

How important is this? In the Prius, a car where MPG is everything, the second generation actually used a thermos for the engine coolant to keep it as hot as possible for as long as possible in anticipation of the next startup.
This is helpful info, to me at least. It's not surprising, just helpful correlation to what I've seen and confirms my suspicions that there is a harsher consequence on this Outback in cold conditions (regardless of what degree of cold; it matters. I understand that.) But maybe it matters MUCH more than I could previously justify in my mind.
And that ALSO confirms what I am seeing because I do have a "short" 11 mile drive to work, and my car barely gets up to temp by the time I arrive, even though it includes about 7 miles of interstate at 65 to 75 mph, depending on whether I'm willing to try to squeeze more mpg out of the tank. (I've about given up hope, and the tiny difference seems not worth it.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by zim2dive View Post
I tried my best to get correct #'s for the Jetta (was mildly surprised not to have to use the way-back machine ) but ...

Long term (ie. 2000+ miles) trip computer results on those cars would show me averaging close to highway values .. "lifetime" on my Outback was 25.3 last I checked. It's a big drop to go from *averaging* (just below) highway to *averaging* (just above) city.

Note: with regard to "long term" on those trip computers.. I tended to reset every few 1000 miles b/c they seemed to have a similar bug to the 2015 Outback (altho it never occured to me at the time).. ie. see https://www.subaruoutback.org/forums/...light=lifetime .. the short version being that some SW co-op at Subaru appears to have used an 8-bit value for a variable when 8-bits is several factors of 2 too few.)
Yeah, glad you added that "Note." I was going to remind you to hang in there! You'll be getting 40mpg soon, according to the goofy, lying Life time average on this car.
That doesn't seem to bother some here, but it is pretty pathetic of Subaru not to have corrected that, or at least put out an info bulletin or something to let people know it is in fact buggy, and what the best way is to address said "bug."

Quote:
Originally Posted by grimsurfer View Post
Private message sent.

I'd propose collecting the following data for 1000 miles or so:

1. Trip length + number of stops (shut-downs/restarts);
2. Max speed;
3. Average speed;
4. Elevation change;
---- everything above can easily be collected by the gps unit, though some pen and paper work needed to capture data between resets ----
5. Fuel used (ethanol or straight gasoline?);
6. Temperature (min, mean, max) per day, unless transiting different regions (where more data would be required);
7. Wind (anything over 5 mph) and direction;
8. Driving technique (hyper mile, cruise control, etc. for highway drives);
9. Load (# of adults, cargo -- including trailer towing, stuff on roof racks);
10. Tire type (OE, winters, LRR) and inflation pressure;
11. AIRCON use (Y/N).

... and, of course, fuel used and distance (or fuel economy in mpg or l/100 km).

One could also record general road surface, but I'd recommend simply noting the presence of rain, snow, or gravel roads along the route of each trip.

This approach is consistent with the data collection methodology used to support my own study here:

https://www.subaruoutback.org/forums/...b-mileage.html
I'm glad you are apparently able to do this kind of data collection and manipulation, and it is wonderfully valuable. I mean that.


But quite frankly, I for one have WAY more important things to do than to add that PILE of additional data gathering to my day. Not a chance that's going to happen.
And if that makes you think my opinions don't mean much, well, hey, you are totally right. And I'm glad my opinions won't keep you up at night. They don't keep me up, either. :-)
(But sometimes bothering to provide them here does, I admit, and I'm working to correct that.)

One of the things that has been a bit of a distractor and still is, even though it DOES play a potential role in this issue, is the temperature factor.
I posted long ago my mpg concerns, way before ANY cold temps had surfaced anywhere. At THAT time, the chant was, "Wait till the car is broken in."
Baloney. Said it then, saying it now. I have 10,000 miles now. Have never seen any notable change overall. The changes ARE due to weather (yeah, Eagle, I never said what you insinuated, but then, that's the way you seem to read things) and I accept that impact. Though I feel it is an extremely harsh impact.


And as I said BEFORE it got cold, I already saw the underperformance in terms of mpg.


The reason I raise that again is because when things warm up all over, the problem mpg will still be around, but probably to a lesser degree.
And then the chant will likely be, "See! We told you it would get better." DUH. Of COURSE it will.
But I can vouch for at least MY experience that this car has NOT given a higher mpg IN THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES than my wife's 2010 Outback with 150,000+ miles on it. And it clearly SHOULD do this by now, break-in notwithstanding.
CVT notwithstanding.
I'm saying unless the FLUID in the CURRENT CVT is significantly different than the fluid in the 2010, that the CVT is NOT A REASON for the poorer mpg in cold weather.

But I will say this, I honestly do NOT believe for a minute that it is necessary to take that ultra-detailed approach to simply draw the conclusion that this newest Outback has at least a group of its members that underperforms in terms of mpg. It's WAY easier to see this is the case simply by reading the posts and drawing conclusions based on the credibility of those who post.



I see plenty of posts that I immediately discount, based on the clearly displayed lack of understanding of differences between what the car display says someone got that tankful or is getting at a certain moment in time (useless data.) These people are entitled to their opinion and have every right to post. And I totally discount what they say because they aren't even recognizing how far off the car readout can be. The ODOMETER doesn't lie (much; in fact, it is slightly LOWER than actual on my car, by about 1%) and the pumped gas amount (hopefully) doesn't lie (though it isn't inerrant, either.)

So when someone like Zim posts as he has the kind of carefully watched data over a long time, it is no trouble at all for me to find his posts credible and worth consideration.

And I understand that several of you who are grilling him for more data have a perspective on this that supports your desire for that, but if you stop insisting on the "perfect" set of data, you ought to be able to reasonably conclude that the general point he makes is valid. And he's not alone.
When you are standing out in the rain, do you have to get a radar picture and a humidity reading first, before you conclude you are wet?
I find it hard to understand any other conclusion, but then, my first-hand observation of this every single day might make it easy for me.
SubiesSince99 is offline  
post #854 of 1751 (permalink) Old 03-18-2015, 12:53 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 18
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by grimsurfer View Post
Private message sent.

...

This approach is consistent with the data collection methodology used to support my own study here:

https://www.subaruoutback.org/forums/...b-mileage.html

Waiting on that private message.


I am surprised to not see OBDII data collection on your record keeping. Also if I read it correctly, best case scenario, mostly highway, mostly in top gear, best petrol, the car still failed to achieve the EPA rating? (30.6 mpg if split 80% and 20%).


My personal experience is the car timing is heavily pulled back with winter fuel, as well as the tcm apparently delaying lockup when timing/spark is pulled back (I am in Washington state and the temp has been steady, fuel mix has changed). I am getting close to city EPA, can't complain too much (other than tcm lockup delay).

Last edited by Fooled; 03-18-2015 at 01:13 AM. Reason: spelling, more info
Fooled is offline  
post #855 of 1751 (permalink) Old 03-18-2015, 05:44 AM
Registered User
 
grimsurfer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Car: 2015 Outback 6MT & 1991 240 (original owner). Previous rides: 2005 Impreza, 2010 Forester.
Posts: 312
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fooled View Post
I am surprised to not see OBDII data collection on your record keeping. Also if I read it correctly, best case scenario, mostly highway, mostly in top gear, best petrol, the car still failed to achieve the EPA rating? (30.6 mpg if split 80% and 20%).
That comes later, following initial data analysis suggesting where the problem may lie. The reason for this is that there are a variety of OBD II data points that one could draw. So many as to make it much more difficult to focus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fooled View Post
My personal experience is the car timing is heavily pulled back with winter fuel, as well as the tcm apparently delaying lockup when timing/spark is pulled back (I am in Washington state and the temp has been steady, fuel mix has changed). I am getting close to city EPA, can't complain too much (other than tcm lockup delay).
You asked me what data to collect. In terms of fuel, the test should be run on straight gasoline. To do otherwise is to add an uncontrolled variable (in US gasoline that does contain ethanol, the quantity can vary from a little over 1% to as much as 10% without any specific labelling. Source: EPA.

2015 Outback 6MT
1991 Volvo 240 (original owner)
Past Rides: 2005 Impreza, 2010 Forester
grimsurfer is offline  
post #856 of 1751 (permalink) Old 03-18-2015, 06:46 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: NC (USA)
Car: 2015 Outback 2.5i Premium
Posts: 660
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotomoto View Post
No I was assuming you forgot what your EPA rating was during your ownership. Our memories fade. That's why folks keep asking for data.
Memory is only an issue for those trying to pick the story apart... I never *knew* the EPA values for that car while I was driving it (bought it used, never saw a window sticker and never cared to look it up until this debate) ... the "can I get to Columbus" was an exercise of youth bravado.. not of ECO-mpg-awareness (altho it turns out you can't really do one without the other).

However the parameters of the trip were bounded (ie. last I checked the locations of Raleigh, Columbus, and the size of the gas tank on the 87 Jetta haven't changed).... so it was easy to figure out what the MPGs had to be (approx) and easy to look up the rating of EPA to see if my driving back then also was returning similar results in an effort to show that yes (for whatever reason), I've seen this kind of good mpg result well back in to the dark ages of my driving.

2mpg above the EPA (apples-to-apples with the 2015 OB method) thru the mountains of WVa (big by East coast standards), above speed limit (b/c that was the only way to have torque for the up-mountain sections for the Jetta in 5th gear). Not too shabby of a result.
zim2dive is offline  
post #857 of 1751 (permalink) Old 03-18-2015, 01:15 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Car: 2015 2.5i Limited
Posts: 171
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by zim2dive View Post
One thing to understand about the trip computers in the VW Passats which I owned...

there were *3* trip computers...

trip A (like the OB)
trip B (like the OB)
and
"this trip".. unlike the OB (I guess you can use A or B like this if you want)... the "this trip" would reset itself once the car was off for some short amt of time... but if you did a couple of quick stops it would keep going...

the point being, that it was very easy to track 3 levels of MPGs...

a) this trip (ie. how did I do on *THIS* commute, *THIS* morning)
b) TripA... how did I do on *THIS* tank of gas
c) TripB.. how have I done for a longer period of time (ie. 1000's of miles)

so it was very easy to get at this data.
You can change the Eco Monitor to show "Average", which is "this trip". It's somewhere under settings. Then you can track all 3 levels you had on the Passat, as we as a 4th, "Lifetime". With the caveat that "Lifetime" starts to go wonky around 7500 miles.
bwalter is offline  
post #858 of 1751 (permalink) Old 03-18-2015, 01:58 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: NC (USA)
Car: 2015 Outback 2.5i Premium
Posts: 660
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwalter View Post
You can change the Eco Monitor to show "Average", which is "this trip". It's somewhere under settings. Then you can track all 3 levels you had on the Passat, as we as a 4th, "Lifetime". With the caveat that "Lifetime" starts to go wonky around 7500 miles.
thanks.. I'll look in to that.
zim2dive is offline  
post #859 of 1751 (permalink) Old 03-18-2015, 04:50 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: South Dartmouth, Ma / Killington, Vt
Car: 2015 Outback 3.6R Package 23
Posts: 1,321
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
3.6R with less than 1000 miles on it. Mostly highway with speeds between 65 and 75. Temps mostly above freezing. 24.3 mpg using gallons pumped, miles driven, and a calculator.
GeoffD is offline  
post #860 of 1751 (permalink) Old 03-18-2015, 05:00 PM
Registered User
 
grimsurfer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Car: 2015 Outback 6MT & 1991 240 (original owner). Previous rides: 2005 Impreza, 2010 Forester.
Posts: 312
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
using gallons pumped, miles driven, and a calculator.
As anyone who's serious about tracking mpg should @GeoffD.

I've yet to own a car whose trip computer isn't a little optimistic.


2015 Outback 6MT
1991 Volvo 240 (original owner)
Past Rides: 2005 Impreza, 2010 Forester
grimsurfer is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Subaru Outback - Subaru Outback Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome