2014 Mitsubishi Mirage ecodriving highway run: 75 MPG (US) / 3.1 L/100 km

[MetroMPG]

The 1.2L, 3-cylinder 2014 Mirage (or whatever they end up calling it) is coming to the US and Canada this fall.

Officially, it's rated at or near the top of its class in multiple countries where it has already been rolled out, and that will likely be the case in the US/Canada too, with an EPA combined rating in the high 30's mpg US (that's an educated guess).

So we've been on the hunt for evidence of its fuel economy potential in the hands of people who know how to do it.

This week I stumbled on some economy run numbers from an event in Thailand that might interest ecomodders...

• Round-trip highway run: 1,590 km (988 mi.)
• using two cars: both 1.2L, one CVT automatic, one 5-speed
• tires aired up to 45 PSI (35 is factory spec)
• no other vehicle modifications
• multiple passengers in the cars
• air conditioning used
• target speed of 80-90 km per hour (~49-56 mph)
• gas pump readings used for calculations, and the cars were shaken vigorously side-to-side at each fill-up to ensure as much fuel went in and air came out as possible
• using 91 octane fuel
• fuel filler doors & hoods taped shut by event marshall

I think it's fair to say the drivers probably weren't "hypermiling experts", though they were auto journalists.

Results:

• 66.2 mpg (US) / 3.5 L/100 km from the CVT-equipped car
• 75.1 mpg (US) / 3.1 L/100 km from the 5-speed car

More details:

• Mirage economy run Thailand: 31.9 km/L (3.1L/100km, 75 mpg US) 5-spd

[2000neon]

Wow great numbers and some serious potential there.

[MetroMPG]

It does look pretty good, though admittedly the conditions were just about optimal for an eco-cruise: long distance, moderate speeds, warm weather (negated somewhat by the A/C use).

The car's eco-downfall is the usual culprit: top gear in the manual is too short (to satisfy an ecomodder).

Though we learned this week that the U.K. is getting a taller final drive and a couple of different 4th/5th ratios. Who knows what we'll get in North America - probably the worst combo.

[2000neon]

Exactly, the speed driven was more suited for fuel economy than the average driver would do on the highway, but it's nice to know that the potential is there, and a good hypermiler will likely be able to match (or beat) those numbers.

[PressEnter[]]

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

Who knows what we'll get in North America - probably the worst combo.

So long as it's not CVT only

I thought Canada was supposed to get it before the US, though, is it fall for both now? There's still nothing on the Mitsubishi USA site. I was thinking about taking a trip up to Canada for a sneak peek if you guys get it first.

[MetroMPG]

So long as it's not CVT only

Well, we're told we'll get the 5-speed in Canada. But you'll have to wait for the NY Auto show next month to find out what's in the cards for the U.S.

Originally they said they'd be available in Canada first, but now they're saying fall for both countries. It could have to do with the trademark/model name issue.

[War_Wagon]

Well sometimes there are "ride and drives" for new models of cars where I tend to hang out. If the chance comes up I will try to get some seat time in one MetroMPG. If that comes up and someone wants to loan me a Scangauge I will post what numbers I can.

[MetroMPG]

That would be most excellent.

FYI, the car comes with a resettable fuel consumption display:



factory fuel economy gauge/display (MID): details, accuracy

[niky]

That's fricking amazing!

[MetroMPG]

Yeah, but it's so frickin amazing, it leaves me more than a little skeptical. Especially after seeing the numbers from the Mirage you tested.

Their 75 mpg US (31.9 km/L) from a target speed of "80-90 km per hour" doesn't sync with the numbers you saw in your test car of ~58 mpg US / ~24.5 km/L at 80 kph / 50 mph.

Sure, their trip average speed would have been lower than their target cruising speed. And sure, their cars were different than yours (they had better aero, significantly higher tire pressure).

O wait...

I just took a look at topographical info for their route, and guess what: they went from sea level, to ~2000 ft / 609 m and back again. One giant pulse & glide? Or many pulses and glides, perhaps even with some neutral coasting on the way back down to Bangkok?

The needle on the plausibility-o-meter just jumped a little higher.