
Originally Posted by
cyberian
I don't know the advantage of ECO mode in the Rio. It's always ON when I'm driving but the fuel consumption is even worst than the Chevy Optra 1.6 of my family.
FC REPORT:
1st Fill:
- Fuel Low warning light triggered when fuel left is 52km (distance to empty on trip computer)
- Filled up 9.2L (P500) unleaded: distance to empty = 154km
- Road and traffic condition = mix city & highway, light to moderate traffic
- Driving style, speed: light footed, 70KM max. speed (highway)
- distance traveled on next fuel low warning light (same fuel left at 52km distance to empty) = 42km
- Trip computer Fuel Economy = 15.4L/100km or 6.5km/L
- Actual FC (manual computation): 42km/9.2L = 4.56km/L
2nd Fill:
- Fuel Low warning light triggered when fuel left is 52km (distance to empty on trip computer)
- Filled up 9.2L (P500) unleaded: distance to empty = 154km
- Road and traffic condition = CITY only, NO traffic (Sunday night on FC test run)
- Driving style, speed: light footed, 20-60km/hr (stops on red traffic lights and slow down on intersections)
- Distance traveled on next fuel low warning light (same fuel left at 52km distance to empty) = 47km
- Trip computer Fuel Economy = 13.8L/100km or 7.2km/L
- Actual FC (manual computation): 47km/9.2L = 5.10km/L
3rd Fill: (full tank)
- Fuel Low warning light triggered when fuel left is 52km (distance to empty on trip computer)
- Full tank at 35L (P1,900): distance to empty = 576km
- Road and traffic condition = CITY only, light to moderate with about 10% heavy
- Driving style, speed: light footed, variable
- Fuel gauge reading as of today: 1/4 level, 145 km distance to empty (trip computer)
- Trip computer Fuel Economy = 16.2L/100km or 6.17km/L
- Actual kilometers reading since reset = 145kms
- Actual FC (manual computation) = not available yet, waiting for fuel low warning light to go off.
- My Prediction: around 6km/L on trip computer and actual FC will be around 4.5km/L if I based it on my 1st fill-up yield.
This is only based on my recollection and actual observation. Fuel economy may improved after break-in of 1,000 kms (1st PMS), which I seriously hope so. I haven't tried driving on pure highway (out of town) or driven the car aggressively (zoom-zoom). Also, I haven't tried driving in sport mode as I am driving and testing the unit on city for fc.
Granted the actual fuel consumption (manual computation) improves by 1-2 Liters, but still at 6.5km/L this Rio hatchback is looking more likely to be fuel guzzler for it's size, weight, classification/category and displacement. The much bigger, heavier and more powerful Altis 1.6 has better fc, ask any taxi drivers and the answer is always around 10Km/L City. I drove the Honda Fit 1.5 A/T & City (2011) 1.5 A/T, both has an average of 9.8L/100km City FC.
I cancelled the Bank P.O. for the 2012 Chevy Orlando for this after being convinced by the wife that this Rio is a practical choice for our family of 5 (8,11 & 18 yr old children), and fuel efficient nga daw sabi Kia. The looks, features, standard equipment and the prospect of low fuel economy are the things I took serious consideration.
I informed Kia salesman on my poor FC and he's advising me to give them 2 days to assess and check the unit once it reached 1,000 kms for its 1st PMS. They will perform some tests daw and mentioned plugging in a 1 liter fuel container direct to the engine to test manually the fc. I trust Kia will do it's job to ascertain the cause of the irregular and "not normal" fc on my Rio.
Although it's premature to say if this Rio is "malakas sa gas" at this time, one thing this Rio reminds me of at this time is the Land Cruiser I have back in college that has a 6-cylinder 2F gas engine with an average FC of 4km/L, but the fuel then costs around P8.00/L!
I'll be posting soon my FC on the 3rd fill-up as mentioned above.