[Restlessk]

I was a buyer that waited until the 2013's were available because of the new engine and CVT, and the promised increased fuel mileage of the new 2.5.

I've been disappointed, to say the least, with mileage in the 24's for a mix of about 75% highway driving. We took one 1200 mile trip of all highway mileage, and it delivered just over 27 mpg cruising at 70 on flat roads.

Prior to buying, my principle experience had been driving 2011 and 2012 Outbacks which were loaner cars at my local Porsche dealer. And, in exactly the same conditions, their computers showed 27-28 mpg where mine shows 24 now.

So, my assertion is that the changes Subaru made to the 2013s actually reduced fuel economy rather than improved it. Looking at fuelly.com data seems to support that.

Two reactions to likely arguments.

1. The mileage of 2013s is all low mileage vehicles, and mileage will improve after break-in. I'd love to see any study that shows that mileage improves after break-in in more than a negligible way. I've tracked mileage in every car I've owned, and have only noticed an extremely small, if any, improvement. And my Outback has shown absolutely zero improvement after 3500 miles.

2. The EPA rates the 2013s higher, and their testing must have better results than prior years. Although the EPA actually tests very few cars, and generally takes and reports data from the manufacturer. And given scant resources at the EPA, they generally only test major model changes, so it is unlikely that the 2013 Outback would have been tested.

My mileage is not terrible, but is disappointing. It's not a deal breaker for me, but I do think it important that potential buyers know that the 2013s don't deliver better fuel mileage.

 

[subiesailor]

Dude 3500 miles?

Christ my last two subarus didn't hit their max mileage till I had nearly 20,000 miles on them.

Not to mention till you do the same trip many times you haven't any idea what type of mileage you should see.

I do a 700 mile round trip every year when its windy ie head wind with 70mph speeds we get 23-26mpg. When it isn't windy and we leave the roof rack junk at home we get 27-28mpg - if I drop the speed to 60-65mph we get 29-30mpg.

Your 70mph speed not even counting road conditions - temps - wind etc returning 27mpg seems to be in the right range for not knowing the traffic - road - wind and load conditions.

By the way my 2001 subaru 2.5 with 5spd MT - was 23-25mpg on that same trip pending wind - and load etc at 70mph. If we dropped it to 60-65mph the all time record tank was 28mpg. We put 180,000 miles on that car and did the same trips more times than I can count. I could predict what mileage we would get before the first gallon of fuel was burned. That car also did not start returning its best mileage till it had nearly 20,000 miles on it.

Same goes for my Gen4 OB 20,000 miles the mileage is very different than what it got at 3500

 

[Restlessk]

Dude 3500 miles?

Christ my last two subarus didn't hit their max mileage till I had nearly 20,000 miles on them.

By how much? For what reason?

If that were the case, there would be a statistical difference between 2011s and 2012s on fuelly, which there isn't.

Sorry, I just don't buy it. Happy to chime in and admit defeat in 18 months if I'm wrong (in fact, I'd be insanely happy), but I don't think that's going to happen...

 

[subiesailor]

Who uses fuelly? I don't

My Turkey Day trip SF to LA was a big surprise. 300 miles of nearly 100% stop and go traffic 9hrs worth. I found a way to creep along at 30-40mph resulting in a calculated 30mpg tank average for the trip to LA and on the way back the last 100 miles we actually saw the 70mph speed limit that tank was 29.5 mpg - higher speeds for a slightly larger portion of the trip.

You haven't had your car long enough to even know what type of mileage its going to return for given conditions so sit back enjoy the ride and stop your crying.

 

[Restlessk]

SubieSailor, 4 things.

1. My 70 mph experience was dead flat west Texas roads, zero wind, steady at 70 for 120 miles at a shot. 27 mpg. My contention is that it won't get much better than that.

2. Fuelly represents a larger sample size, more scientific approach to tracking mileage than anecdotal data, as your trip from LA over Thanksgiving.

3. I'm not 'crying,' but making an assertion that I believe useful in a potential buyer of a 2013 understanding what they're getting. And perhaps helping leverage Subaru into a software modification that might improve our 2013s.

4. My assertion is that 2013s have reduced mileage over earlier gen 4s. You have an earlier gen 4, so your excellent results kinda are helping me make my point. The 2013 has a new engine and a new transmission, and all the software that drives them. The results will be different than in your model year.

 

[subiesailor]

Put more miles on your car!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My car never event posted 27mpg on my flat zero wind 70mph trips before it was over 15,000 miles.


PUT MORE MILES ON YOUR CAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Restlessk]

Put more miles on your car!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LOL! I do every day!

 

[pgh]

Interesting, my 12 Impreza with the new (2nd gen CVT) and 2.0 FB engine gets the same real world fuel economy as my 10 Outback with a EJ/1st gen CVT. City only with short quick drives I get 22 in both. That's spot on for the OB but 5 short for the Impreza. I still say the last year or 2 of the EJ engine was the best. The new FB motors could probably use a nip and tuck IMO.

 

[gomjabber]

I think I saw a bump in my mpg around 10k.

 

[1bythesea]

My 2012 2.5, with just under 10 K miles, has seen an improvement of 1-1.5 mpgs since inception.

 

[mpnret]

And, in exactly the same conditions, their computers showed 27-28 mpg where mine shows 24 now.
.

Sounds like you are relying on the computer. I would double check with actual fuel use. Remember the pre 2013 was off to the plus side and was user adjustable. I am not sure what the deal is with the 2013 computer yet. My wife's 2013 is getting 27.3 at 3,500 miles where her 2010 was getting 27.0 at 30,000 miles when we traded it in. Both on the same roads, almost no highway, part city, part country roads. I expect the 2013 will get better once we have some miles on it.

 

[gomjabber]

This is true about the computer. I only use it for reference and always figure my mileage will be about 1.5mpg less than what it is displaying when I fill up.

 

[rockthebeef]

FWIW I have just passed 10k on my 2012 2.5.

I like Fuelly since you can track every fill-up very easily. I just send a text message at every fill-up and it's automagically entered into my account.

See my profile and click "chart all fuel-ups". You'll see my mpg is fairly consistent. The high spots are from road trips. 26.8 with bikes on roof, 29.9 without. the low spot (19mpg) was from a partial fill-up, so there is some noise in that calculation.

The Grey (Subaru Outback) | Fuelly

edit - "chart all fuel-ups" seems to be down a the moment. Come back later.

 

[gomjabber]

I gotta do that text thing

 

[Restlessk]

I wasn't trying to discuss whether mileage improves post break-in. That discussion seems to have been beaten to death here, and it's all anecdotal.

I was hoping to discuss whether the drivetrain changes in 13 actually reduced efficiency rather than improved it. Seems like a likely premise. Subaru claims an increase of about 5%, real world data on fuelly show a decrease of about 5%.

 

[Restlessk]

I gotta do that text thing

X2. I record the mileage and gallons of gas on the text writer on my phone and enter them on the computer later. Texting would be excellent!

 

[autorot8]

I average 28 consistently, 50/50 city highway. Last weekend, Tahoe and back from Bay Area with a Yakima 16S roofbox loaded with ski equipment, averaged 31. Have 7500 miles. I have manually checked computer and computer reads .1 mpg low.

 

[subiesailor]

I average 28 consistently, 50/50 city highway. Last weekend, Tahoe and back from Bay Area with a Yakima 16S roofbox loaded with ski equipment, averaged 31. Have 7500 miles. I have manually checked computer and computer reads .1 mpg low.

That drive has been fairly slow in the last few weekends due to the snow ;-)

I was getting into the 30's last year the few trips I made - primarily due to the slow speeds due to traffic. But nothing wrong with that!

Once you do 70mph and up with the box and gear on the lid the mileage drops.

 

[autorot8]

That drive has been fairly slow in the last few weekends due to the snow ;-)

I was getting into the 30's last year the few trips I made - primarily due to the slow speeds due to traffic. But nothing wrong with that!

Once you do 70mph and up with the box and gear on the lid the mileage drops.

No snow over Thanksgiving. Drove the speed limit most of way. Only slowed by some of the curves or other vehicles.

 

[edawg]

Agree with other posts... At 2K, mileage is improving already on mine from 25.5 or so to 27 or so on the computer in the city...

Interesting (to me at least) that the computer average seems to vary depending on whether I put in a full or partial tank... If I fill up less than 1/3rd of a tank, the computer MPG is 1MPG LESS than hand-calculation actually. If I fill up a full tank, the computer is 1MPG MORE than hand-calculation. But, I've had one full tank where the computer was also a tad less than hand-calculation so I'm curious why.