Snoopy

ALL MANUFACTURERS provide their respective EPA Highway MPG at the same mandated speed of 65mph.

MWG2...if what you posted is normal for YOUR year around driving, then you have a problem.....either physical or mechanical .

For example....at 65 mph, with ACCEPTABLE DRIVING PRACTICES, you should be experiencing something closer to the manufacturers stated MPG.

I would do some checking !!!

jx3

Did either of you do most of the "leading"? How close was the "trailing" vehicle to the leader?

pitbull76

Good lord! That isn't right. I will still get 25-26MPG at 80MPH, but close to 30 if I can keep it near 70 and don't have to run the air.

DavidF

It all comes down to the RPM's. I remember one time I rented a geo tracker (4 cyl, don't how the size) to go on a camping trip in New Mexico. It got really lousy gas mileage on the interstate in NM where the speed limit is 75, less than the six cyl suv's on the trip, but it was loaded down with gear and people. However, on the state highways, at 55mph or more, it got really great gas mileage.

My TrailBlazer (which I traded for the HHR) could cruise at 75mph with no effort, and the gas mileage didn't really change much from 55 to 75. (I live in Oklahoma, where many of the places the speed limit is 75, and 70 elsewhere on the interstate).

With the HHR, I've noticed that if I set the cruise immediately after I've sped up to 70~75 mph the rpms "stick" at around 4000, however, if I speed up and then take my foot off the gas, I can cruise around 3000 rpm. If I lived in Montana (speed limit 85) I would have kept the TrailBlazer; but since I live in Oklahoma and drive to work in a city, I have high hopes for the HHR.

With less than 1500 miles on my new car, my combined mpg (per the DIC) is hovering around 23~23.5 (2.4L), my Trailblazer was pretty consistent between 17 and 18. That's with one tank of 91/premium, the others at 87 octane. Others have said on this board that mpg creeps up as the engine gets "broken in", so we'll see

DavidF

Well, in Oklahoma, we pretty much run the air 300 days a year, so here's hoping...I bought the car a couple of weeks ago, and have already had to run the air a couple of times.

pg318

I don't think the HHRs aerodynamics help at higher speed, the rounded back end without any defined breakaways seem to cause a fair amount of turbulence - on cold days when there's a lot of condensation from the exhaust it's clearly visible, and is probably the reason the rear window gets so dirty so quickly.
Not that the Highlander is that much better by initial observation, but it's the tiny details that make the difference, like the little lip and roll channel under the rear bumper that serves as a breakaway to cleanly separate the underbody airflow from the dead zone behind the vehicle, that are wind tunnel honed is a way that a retro design just can't be.
My HHR gets according to the DIC about 40mpg at 55, but falls rapidly from there up, to about 31-32mpg at 65.

RaceOn

Guys, I appreciate all your comments and observations, but my HHR flat does not get good mileage above 70 MPH. It's not tire pressure, it's not who was in front most of the time, we both used the same 87 octane winter crap gas, nor was it a hybrid, it's just that once you get around 2500 RPM's the HHR mileage goes to hell. While driving through the Illinois snowstorm on Thursday night I could only go 30 to 40 MPH, guess what, 29.8 MPG! And that was on and off the throttle. The fact is that my B-I-L's Toyota slapped my HHR around on that trip. I just didn't like losing to a Toyota....or my B-I-L!

Pat

pitbull76

At least for me, the air seems to take away 1-2MPG at highway speeds. Still quite reasonable mileage.

pitbull76

LOL! Hey, you got at least 3 things on his Toyota though:

1. The HHR has better style (IMO)
2. The HHR didn't cost ya nearly as much
3. Unless he has a hybrid, I'd bet good money that in mixed or in town driving your HHR would get much better mileage than the Toyota.

Black Rose

4. The HHR is not a Yota