The 2019 Stinger has worse fuel economy than the 2018 Stinger? Why?

[GenesisG70]

I did 1400kms (870mls) over 3 days, the screen shot was my first leg of the trip, it was non-stop @ Highway Driving 110kms/hr (68mls/hr) with cruise control on.

Mine is an MY18 = Oct.17 build
361kms = 224mls
7.3 litres per 100kms = 32 miles per gallon
For a V6 twin turbo, heavy sedan carrying 2 adults & luggage these are pretty impressive results.

View attachment 20673

WOW! Where you pushin the stinger from behind?

 

[Stinger GT SS]

WOW! Where you pushin the stinger from behind?

Mate, she ran like a clock, I also had the Air-Con on as well, I also use only Premium Fuel (Shell V-Power) & here that’s 98 octane.

 

[GenesisG70]

Mate, she ran like a clock, I also had the Air-Con on as well, I also use only Premium Fuel (Shell V-Power) & here that’s 98 octane.

Mate that is impressive! Happy your enjoying your car.

 

[Dmchristie1]

If you aren't used to it, I could see how that may start to be an annoyance. The Genesis Coupe ironically has a larger fuel tank but I beat the piss out of mine so I'm used to filling up every few days, especially since I don't let the tank go below 1/3 or so whenever possible. Without traffic my commute for now is about a half hour. Hopefully I'll cut that down to 15 minutes later this year.

I replaced a Chevy VOLT with the stinger. Went from filling up once every 6 weeks to to once every 6 days

 

[GenesisG70]

I replaced a Chevy VOLT with the stinger. Went from filling up once every 6 weeks to to once every 6 days

Did you mod your Stinger that much? Did you swap it for a V12 engine? I don't think a V12 engine will fit into that engine bay...

 

[Dmchristie1]

Did you mod your Stinger that much? Did you swap it for a V12 engine? I don't think a V12 engine will fit into that engine bay...

No mods just keep it in sport mode ALL the time... commute was about a mile outside of the volt electric only mode. So burned a little gas every day. When I traded it my average lifetime mpg was 75 ish

 

[Oryan]

So if the GT was rated at say 10 mpg city, 16 mpg hwy, with the same engine performance, sales would be the same? I doubt it (I know I wouldn't have been interested). Fuel economy may not be at the top of the list of considerations for many GT buyers, but it is at least somewhere on the list for a good number (a few have even unashamedly entered their data on fuelly.com). There's a point at which some potential buyers will turn away. In this case, there is a hit on paper of more than 10% to city mpg. And, what happens if gasoline prices rise? Fuel economy is the number one consideration overall amongst all drivers, but the vast majority of them still don't buy subcompacts. Some people, me included, like to have a mixture of performance, comfort, utility, and economy. The Stinger GT provides such a combination. Maybe "the average person shopping for a RWD/AWD car with a twin-turbo" doesn't care but Kia thought they might and put in the Eco driving mode. It would be funny if Kia realizing their error would eliminate Eco for the 2020 model year.

Dodge isn't having problems selling their behemoth land barges with the SRT 392 that aren't rated much better. Neither is Chevy or Ford with their V8 offerings. On top of that, the numbers you listed aren't hard to pull off in a GT at all especially if you start modding it. This is a grand touring/sport sedan, not the Sorento or Forte or what have you. Completely different markets, with most buyers having completely different priorities. I'm not saying fuel economy can't matter and for you, maybe it was more of a point than it was for me, and that's fine. And let's be real, "Eco" Mode in this car is a joke as far as actually affecting MPG, basically a gimmick thrown in there because most of the competition does the same. Nerfing pedal response is damn near all it is and you can get the same numbers in Sport as you can in Eco if you just operate your right foot more gently and shifted yourself into the highest gear possible at all times. Anybody that cared that much about fuel economy, and still wanted a Stinger..there's a very fine 2.0T for that.

 

[SteveCo]

I did 1400kms (870mls) over 3 days, the screen shot was my first leg of the trip, it was non-stop @ Highway Driving 110kms/hr (68mls/hr) with cruise control on.

Mine is an MY18 = Oct.17 build
361kms = 224mls
7.3 litres per 100kms = 32 miles per gallon
For a V6 twin turbo, heavy sedan carrying 2 adults & luggage these are pretty impressive results.

Yes, on a 300 km highway cruise last week I was at 8.3l/100 KM. That was in ECO at a cruise setting of 122 km/hr, with lots of hills, on winter gas at a temperature of around -20C - so in my opinion a very good number. In the summer I've had no problem getting into the 7's. When I drive in sports mode and with a heavy foot, the mileage plummets as one would expect.

I've found that the twin turbo engine is very flexible, and capable of significantly beating the published fuel economy numbers - it's all dependent on how you drive it. I'm quite happy with what I've seen, and it's certainly exceeded my expectations so far when trying to minimize fuel consumption.

 

[GenesisG70]

No mods just keep it in sport mode ALL the time... commute was about a mile outside of the volt electric only mode. So burned a little gas every day. When I traded it my average lifetime mpg was 75 ish

But I'm sure you are having a blast every day!

 

[Fergalis]

I did 1400kms (870mls) over 3 days, the screen shot was my first leg of the trip, it was non-stop @ Highway Driving 110kms/hr (68mls/hr) with cruise control on.

Mine is an MY18 = Oct.17 build
361kms = 224mls
7.3 litres per 100kms = 32 miles per gallon
For a V6 twin turbo, heavy sedan carrying 2 adults & luggage these are pretty impressive results.

View attachment 20673

Aussie Imperial gallons or US gallons? (big difference)

 

[Rodrigobites]

True, but the tank is on the smaller side. It's annoying to be going the gas station every 5 days if you've got a long daily commute.

Wel, if you’re putting out ridiculous numvers it does matter. But if you’re buying this car MPG is not your concern

 

[SteveCo]

Aussie Imperial gallons or US gallons? (big difference)

Lots of online calculator/converters available, if you weren't aware of them - most simple conversions like this can be done directly in Google.

His conversion was to US gallons - with Imperial gallons it would be closer to 38 mpg. If you want to compare, just change the unit.

 

[Stinger GT SS]

Aussie Imperial gallons or US gallons? (big difference)

I quoted US gallons

 

[dgreen045]

Keep this in mind


Fuel Economy in Cold Weather

 

[Revvdmedia]

My Stinger generally averages about 2L/100KM better than my 5.0 Mustang GT did on average commutes and with AWD is faster off the line to 60mph, not from a roll though. I must say though, the 5.0 was sometimes worth the fuel penalty for the soundtrack

 

[MerlintheMad]

Dodge isn't having problems selling their behemoth land barges with the SRT 392 that aren't rated much better. Neither is Chevy or Ford with their V8 offerings. On top of that, the numbers you listed aren't hard to pull off in a GT at all especially if you start modding it. This is a grand touring/sport sedan, not the Sorento or Forte or what have you. Completely different markets, with most buyers having completely different priorities. I'm not saying fuel economy can't matter and for you, maybe it was more of a point than it was for me, and that's fine. And let's be real, "Eco" Mode in this car is a joke as far as actually affecting MPG, basically a gimmick thrown in there because most of the competition does the same. Nerfing pedal response is damn near all it is and you can get the same numbers in Sport as you can in Eco if you just operate your right foot more gently and shifted yourself into the highest gear possible at all times. Anybody that cared that much about fuel economy, and still wanted a Stinger..there's a very fine 2.0T for that.

I kept to Sport mode for the first c. 2K miles, and almost always used the paddle shifters, as you describe here. And my mpg average was pretty much as good as anything I have got since then, using Custom with engine and trans in Eco: and trying to keep my mpg meter pegged to the right as much as possible for as long as possible. (That can be a fun challenge in itself, especially if you drive where you can't cut loose.)

Much about cars these days is gimmicky. They include a bunch of features and "options", to give the driver the impression that s/he is doing something that affects the car's performance or economy. I don't think that most of these options are much more than gimmicks intended to engage the driver more. We convince ourselves that we "feel" a difference between this "mode" or that; but mostly it is subjective perception.

 

[Revvdmedia]

We convince ourselves that we "feel" a difference between this "mode" or that; but mostly it is subjective perception.

There are 2 definite differences that you can feel and see between normal/eco and Sport. Throttle position sensitivity is increased in sport - i.e. 25% throttle is more like 40% in feel. Also, the shifts happen at higher RPMs in sport mode compared to Eco/Comfort.

 

[MerlintheMad]

There are 2 definite differences that you can feel and see between normal/eco and Sport. Throttle position sensitivity is increased in sport - i.e. 25% throttle is more like 40% in feel. Also, the shifts happen at higher RPMs in sport mode compared to Eco/Comfort.

That is true. The RPM uptick in Sport is the only real difference that I can feel and hear. The rest I believe but don't really notice a positive "bet my life on it" difference.