Kia Forum banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
2012 Rio EX Sedan UVO Auto/Tanzanite blue/tinted windows/Vent visors
Joined
·
313 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi, I browsed this forum and the Accent forum to find some valuable information on real world benefits of turning Eco On. One thing stands out: people tend to dislike this feature from Kia because of its too important transformation on the driving dynamics. Next week, I will be at my fifth fill up. Now waiting to see the yellow light to come on and I'll have the 4th fill up numbers.

Here are my numbers.
1st, Eco Off: 7.35L/100km, 38.44mpg, city/hgwy, 460km
2nd, Eco On: 7.15L/100km, 39,49mpg, city/hgwy, 501km
3rd, Eco Off: 7,75L/100km, 36.43mpg, hghwy/city, 470km

Well, not that terrific. Someone here has numbers to compare? I don't like vey much driving conditions imposed by Eco On but if the economy would be important, I could live up with it. What do you think of all this?
Thanks
 

·
Registered
former owner of a 2016 Soul SX 2.0L - Caribbean Blue
Joined
·
8,532 Posts
as a general comment it is so difficult to compare, unless you drive identical with it on as opposed to when its off, its hard to make a call. Over many fill ups you might be able to get a better idea.

Only controlled conditions in a lab would be able to point out the actual savings.

I've only tried it on one fill up on my Soul, but will try it again.
 

·
Registered
12 RIO 5 SX, 07 VW Passat 2.0L turbo 1952 Siata Diana
Joined
·
168 Posts
I have had it turned off since the first day I owned the car. People who leave it on should have bought a Prius.
 

·
Registered
2012 Rio EX Sedan UVO Auto/Tanzanite blue/tinted windows/Vent visors
Joined
·
313 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I have had it turned off since the first day I owned the car. People who leave it on should have bought a Prius.
Hi, I like the way you put it. In a nutshell: making a fuss for maybe 1 to 3 liters/100km more. Not worth the loss of power. Is that it?
 

·
Registered
Rio 5dr SX Electric Blue
Joined
·
144 Posts
My worst mileage was 28 mpg and it was with Eco off. I now drive a combination of both on/off with it on only on stop & go conditions. When I am on a highway with cruise on and more than 50 mph speed limit, Eco comes off. I get awful fuel economy regardless but Eco off completely I may as well trade in the car and get anything else. I would much rather have a 23 mpg Camaro than this car with Eco off getting me 26 mpg.
 

·
Registered
2012 Rio EX Sedan UVO Auto/Tanzanite blue/tinted windows/Vent visors
Joined
·
313 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
My worst mileage was 28 mpg and it was with Eco off. I now drive a combination of both on/off with it on only on stop & go conditions. When I am on a highway with cruise on and more than 50 mph speed limit, Eco comes off. I get awful fuel economy regardless but Eco off completely I may as well trade in the car and get anything else. I would much rather have a 23 mpg Camaro than this car with Eco off getting me 26 mpg.
demonr6, this is not normal. Do something about it. Talk to your dealer. Call Kia. Your rio cannot have such bad MPG. Do you drive it as if it were a Camaro? Probably not. You know what, I'm starting to think the engine in the Rio/Accent is not that fuel efficient. Maybe a marvel of technology, but not as fuel efficient as the Fiesta's engine for say. My stepbrother owns a basic Fiesta and he gets the numbers Kia promised we owners would have and it's true, I drove it for a whole week. Still, I wouldn't buy one but the numbers are there.
 

·
Registered
2012 Kia Rio, 2006 Ford Fusion, 2004 Ford Ranger, 2001 Honda S2000
Joined
·
3 Posts
I don't have exact numbers, but i've driven with it both off and on and I actually manage to get better mileage with it off by at least 3mpg so I get around 33 with it on and 36-37mpg when it's off. I'm a leadfoot too.
 

·
Registered
2013 Rio SX Hatchback
Joined
·
417 Posts
I drive a lot with it on, although I hate what it does to the driving experience, cuz when I do turn it off my L/100 km skyrockets. There's no question that for me it improves my mileage.
 

·
Registered
2012 Rio EX Sedan UVO Auto/Tanzanite blue/tinted windows/Vent visors
Joined
·
313 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Hi. I've just filled up. My last numbers with a full tank ant Eco On are quite interesting: 515 km (320 miles), 6,87L/100km (41.14 mpg), 6.5L/100km AVG on the Rio trip computer. Up by .3 L. Not too bad and my first 40 mpg. A/C was on for a 125 km trip. Normal driving. I am a feather foot, always has been. After the fill up, I turned Eco Off and it will be Eco Off for this tank. Gee, I love this car with Eco Off.
 

·
Registered
2013 Rio Ex ECO
Joined
·
5 Posts
hmm. I'm thinking it's driving habits that are hurting fuel economy. I'm coming from a 4x4 Chevy truck getting 12mpg on the highway to a 013 rio5 eco. My longest highway run was a little over an hour and averaged 43mpg at 70mph. mpg increases like crazy when you draft another vehicle. For a couple miles I trailed a tanker truck at 65mph and averaged 58mpg.
So happy with the fuel economy in this car, you just can't drive it like its the sports car its not.
Oh and I have not turned off my ECO button since purchasing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
gas mileage with eco on or off

Racineur what car do you have, even if you had the rio which fits 11.3 gallons of gasoline. 460 kms are 287.5 miles which would give an approximate of 26 mpg.
 

·
Registered
2012 Rio 5 SX
Joined
·
64 Posts
I find I get less MPG when having it on because I live in a hilly area, and the car really struggles on hills with ECO on. I leave it off all the time.
 

·
Registered
2013 RIO5, 2000 GMC Jimmy, 1996 Astro Van, 2004 New Beetle Convertible
Joined
·
126 Posts
+1 on fuelly.com

So far 3 tanks on the new car with ECO on.
Just filled up and figured I will try this tank with ECO off and use the auto sport mode on occasion to force up shifts when I think I am smarter than the computer :p

No point having a lead foot on my commute so I try conserve fuel.
I actually like the ECO mode. Find it much easier to be smooth which fits my commute perfect.
I'll admit there are a couple spots where I turn and have a hill so took a bit to get used to dead throttle for the quick acceleration before the steep part. Putting the right foot a bit deeper or slapping into sport mode for a second overcomes this just fine to ;)

My average is 7.5 but I typically sit in traffic for 20 mins a day almost not moving to get across the bridges... Doing a trip back in forth without the traffic showed 6.5 liters at the beginning of the tank but then jumped to 7.5 as soon as I had to do the typical rush jam up...

cheers,
Paul
 

Attachments

·
Registered
2013 Soul+ Shadow, 1970 Opel GT 1.9 CIH 4M
Joined
·
142 Posts
I find I get less MPG when having it on because I live in a hilly area, and the car really struggles on hills with ECO on. I leave it off all the time.
Yes - Hills and ECO Mode Do Not Mix!

It is definitely not very healthy for our engines lugging at low RPM up a hill or hunting gears constantly in the process...
 

·
Registered
13 Rio 5 EX Auto & 05 Crysler T&C & 52 Ford 8N
Joined
·
42 Posts
I'm in the ECO-On club - and yes, as there is a dead spot in acceleration - I also 'as necessary' use of OFF or Sport mode. (eg: up hill on-ramps etc..)

Our normal driving is local/around town - which is usually short/shopping 10 - 15 minute trips - and we get about 29 mpg (US). But just this week I had to do 340 miles on the interstate - I set cruise at 68 and sat back for about 5 hours - and the computer showed 42 mpg and that was confirmed on fill-up. (Kansas & Oklahoma are pretty flat!)

As other have said - the mpg is linked very much to driving habits and the terrain you are driving. I think if I lived in a hilly region I'd probably have ECO off just for a more comfortable/responsive driving experience.
 

·
Registered
14 Forte SX Koupe,15 Soul EX,58 & 90 Rolls Royces,92 Mercedes 500SL
Joined
·
333 Posts
I am with doberpaw. Driving style is EVERYTHING. Just returned from a 2800 KM 8 day trip From Calgary to Spokane,Seattle & Vancouver B.C crossing the Cascades & returning through the Rocky Mountains. Including city driving in all 3 cities our overall average was 42.2 Imp.MPG or 6.69 Ltrs/100KM. Drove with the ECO on but used the Manual mode on hills to hold around 2500 rpm on steep grades. Cost of the trip was $221.22 Canadian for 187 litres for 2790 kilometers.You can't Fly that cheap for 2 people! Car was very comfortable & certainly no hardship on a 7-8 hour driving day.If only that passenger seat were higher:mad:
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top