Most Fuel Efficient SUV's and Pick-ups 2011

[Ry_Tower]

Eight of the most fuel-efficient SUVs and pickup trucks in the Philippines - Feature Articles | TopGear.com.ph

what do you think guys?! Or is this not reliable? I'm surprised by their numbers on the FXT, CX7 and Tucson BTW.

[111prez]

top gear attributes/cites the source of the test results

it is up to the readers to pass judgment on the credibility of the testers

[niky]

The Tucson 2.0 is really economical. My cousin's just broke in, and he's getting fantastic mileage.

The CX7 is good. Not great... but considering it's a 2.5 liter engine, very very good, nonetheless. This is thanks to the lower friction of the 2.5 MZR engine compared to the old 2.3 and the six speed gearbox. 18 km/l might be possible, given the long cruising gear and the torque converter lock-up (a la Santa Fe and Veracruz), but I'd like to double-test that myself. It's definitely better than many engines of the same size.

The CR-V, exceptional... incredible. Especially considering the interior and cargo space.

ASX, no comment yet, haven't done a long-term test.

[Monseratto]

A CX-7 2.5 gas gets 18.17 km/l, while a Tucson 2.0 CRDi clocks in 9.5 km/l... go figure.

[Ry_Tower]

How about the FXT 11-16km/ltr and range. Very impressive IMHO if indeed true. Modestpa daw claim ng MI eh. calling mr. foresterx

[renzo_d10]

How about the FXT 11-16km/ltr and range. Very impressive IMHO if indeed true. Modestpa daw claim ng MI eh. calling mr. foresterx

Di mo pwede i-ask si foresterx about personal claims coz he doesn't own a forester xt. Forester X 2.0L N/A sakanya not Forester XT 2.5L Forced Induction

[niky]

Kung DOE test yung sa CX7, possible. Dapat. Mga 17-18 din yung Tucson CRDi sa DOE style drive.

In my driving, exact same trip and conditions, 7.5 kml CX7, 8.5 kml Tucson.

[Ry_Tower]

^ I was expecting nga that the Tucson will be better vs the CX-7.

[Starex_Gold]

^ I was expecting nga that the Tucson will be better vs the CX-7.

4WD kasi yung Tucson R-eVGT tsaka masyado masarap pahatawin

Kidding aside, 9.8km/L na average ko ngayon. City driving below 2200RPM.

[niky]

Yup. Masyadong masarap.

That was a mountain-climbing trip. The CX7 gets close because it has a good gearbox, a low-friction engine and 2WD. The Tucson, on the other hand, has a very heavy iron-block engine and AWD... so it's compromised while climbing.

On the highway or in city traffic, the difference will definitely be bigger.

[JJGF]

Mitsubishi Montero Sport GLS-V
Fuel consumption: 13.5km/l --- sa 80kph siguro

lumagpas ka ng 80kph nasa 10km/l

city driving 7-8km/l

parehas lang sa GLS

[Starex_Gold]

Di kaya sa GT-V yan bro JJGF kasi 5 A/T na?

[JJGF]

Di kaya sa GT-V yan bro JJGF kasi 5 A/T na?

ewan lang bro pero malamang hindi pa din hehhehe

2000 L300 FB-4d56, 2000 starex 4d56 a/t saka 2009 MS 2.5 a/t wala naman pinagkaiba sa FC... sa hatak lang

kaya ganyan din malamang GT-V... sa hatak lang nagkakatalo

[Ry_Tower]

ewan lang bro pero malamang hindi pa din hehhehe

2000 L300 FB-4d56, 2000 starex 4d56 a/t saka 2009 MS 2.5 a/t wala naman pinagkaiba sa FC... sa hatak lang

kaya ganyan din malamang GT-V... sa hatak lang nagkakatalo

Ayun, sa hatak at bilis na lang pala nagkatalo. Dapat lamang kunti CRDi ah.

[JJGF]

^ bro base yan sa exprience ko... ewan lang sa iba

7-8km/l lang talaga ang kaya kahit anong gaan ng paa gawin ko hehe

yung 13.5km/l baka sa MID nila nakuha...

[zap.FREEDOM]

Pasok sa list yung navarra pero mababa pa rin yung FC rate na na-harness nila 10.2km/L, sa experience namin nung bago-bago pa yun nakaharness kami ng 12 km/L kung high speed driving (80-100 kph speed on expressways) while city driving pinakamababa na yung 8km/L.

[JackFlash]

How about the FXT 11-16km/ltr and range. Very impressive IMHO if indeed true. Modestpa daw claim ng MI eh. calling mr. foresterx

It's not the Forester XT 2.5L turbo that's in the article but the 2.0 X model:

Subaru Forester 2.0 X
Fuel consumption: 11km/l to 16.4km/l
Source: Motor Image and Top Gear Philippines test

Motor Image said it’s good for at least 11km/l but we say it can run five kilometers more with a lighter tap of the right foot.

With a 2.0L engine, the test shows that it has better FC than the CR-V with the same displacement:

Honda CR-V 2.0 V
Fuel Consumption: 10km/l
Source: Top Gear Philippines test

The Honda CR-V may be getting a bit long in the tooth, the 10km/l reading it registered on an overnight jaunt to and from La Union preceded by the hard thrashing it received is hard to not notice.

FC figures from 3rd party and manufacturers' tests are nice to see, But as we all know, economy runs are a lot different from real world driving - at least those that were done by Petron where cars are run at dawn or late night when traffic is light, speeds don't exceed 100kph (mostly within 60-80kph), aircon turned off, shifting to neutral on downhills, etc. Does anyone know how Top Gear, DOE and car manufacturers conduct their tests?

[rattrapante]

Is this test serious? My Ford Ranger can average 10.5 km/l and that's mix of city and highway driving and that's with a heavy right foot driving. Imagine how much more FC I can save if I go light on the pedal.

The title of the article should be "EIGHT OF THE MOST FUEL-EFFICIENT ADVERTISERS AND SPONSORS OF TOP GEAR"

[Ry_Tower]

Is this test serious? My Ford Ranger can average 10.5 km/l and that's mix of city and highway driving and that's with a heavy right foot driving. Imagine how much more FC I can save if I go light on the pedal.

The title of the article should be "EIGHT OF THE MOST FUEL-EFFICIENT ADVERTISERS AND SPONSORS OF TOP GEAR"

hehe, could not comment on that since I really don't know. But it is noted here that this run has many climbs so the Fc is quite low ata.

[locoroco777]

^ bro base yan sa exprience ko... ewan lang sa iba

7-8km/l lang talaga ang kaya kahit anong gaan ng paa gawin ko hehe

yung 13.5km/l baka sa MID nila nakuha...

balik mo yung stock na gulong ang mags bro.......kaya yan hanggang 11 to 12....