[dsh72]

I was wondering what other Niro Touring edition drivers are getting for MPG. I drive the car pretty conservatively and take advantage of the rolling hills to engage EV mode but seems like I only get between 35-42 MPG. I have never gotten the 45 mpg like Kia says the vehicle can get.

 

[yticolev]

Here is a long recent thread with the exact question:
https://www.kianiroforum.com/forum/9-kia-niro-general-discussion/7447-touring-highway-mpg.html

 

[Roadkill401]

I drive the car pretty conservatively and take advantage of the rolling hills to engage EV mode but seems like I only get between 35-42 MPG. I have never gotten the 45 mpg like Kia says the vehicle can get.

I would ask the obvious question of what did your last car get? I was driving a Ford Edge before, and as hard as I could try, I never got close to averaging what was posted the car should be doing. In the summer time, I could get slightly better Highway when I would take a trip to Niagara Falls, but it is likely the trip has more downhill sections than the way back that I would average worse. But when I headed back it was always through rush hour traffic so you can't really say if that played a larger roll. Around town I was always at least 3-5mpg off. Then in the winter time, it wasn't even close.

Now with my Nero, I am actually getting quite a bit closer to the posted but that was in the Fall when I purchased, and now we are in winter, I am again well below. But as the Niro is far more fuel efficiant, the $$ cost of fuel is not as noticable between what the Egde was giving.

 

[achr]

I was wondering what other Niro Touring edition drivers are getting for MPG. I drive the car pretty conservatively and take advantage of the rolling hills to engage EV mode but seems like I only get between 35-42 MPG. I have never gotten the 45 mpg like Kia says the vehicle can get.

Your gonna hate me. I'm a little "Anal Retentive" when it comes to fuel economy and I log all my fuel purchases into a spreadsheet so I know exactly what our Niro delivers. Since we live in Canada, we're using the metric system but my spreadsheet also calculates both U.S. and Imperial MPG.

We also have the LEAST efficient Niro, a loaded SX Touring with Tech Package. We purchased the vehicle in July 2018 and so far have traveled 7,377 kilometers (4,610 miles). Our average fuel economy to date is 5.103 liters per 100 kilometers. That translates to 46.336 mpg U.S. or 55.603 Imperial MPG. That is probably a mix of about 5,000 kilometers (3,125 miles city and the remainder is highway travelling at highway speeds of 110 kilometers per hour (69 mph). My wife and I are both VERY efficient drivers and we're always trying to see who can get the displayed kiloliterage down another tenth on the onboard display. We also compete to light up the ECO TREE with full foliage. The driving style gauge generally shows 96% efficient, 4% normal, and 0% aggressive. That is not to say that we hold up traffic when accelerating/cruising but we are observant about stoplights changing way ahead of us and use regeneration as much as possible. We also DO use Sport Mode if we need/want more spirited acceleration but I think I've only ever done one full throttle acceleration run. I MAY take it to the drag strip next summer to see what it can do in the quarter mile.

In the warmer months, we were always getting over 50 mpg U.S. (62 Imperial MPG)0 but that has dropped off dramatically as the colder temperatures have kicked in. For the last 1,000 miles, in sub-freezing temperatures, we've averaged about 39 mpg U.S.,> so we're seeing over a 20% fuel economy hit in winter. Percentage wise, that's a bigger winter drop-off than in our ICE vehicle. However, in real terms, the Niro still returns way more than twice the fuel economy of our other vehicle. I'd be REALLY happy if the Niro actually delivered what the onboard "Feel Good Gauge" displays, but alas, like every other vehicle on the road, those gauges are always on the optimistic side of the equation!

 

[Roadkill401]

I am curious how you get the 0% aggresive when using sport mode? I was trying to see if it was a better way to warm up the engine rather than just pushing the Auto button on climate. I drove for about 3 blocks and didn't even push the car into the thin section of ECO on the gauge, but ended up with 2% aggresive. I am at about 2/3 of a tank so it's not like its based on a new full tank reset for the statistics. I have since decided that there is no real gain from going into sports mode. Just have to give the car its 15min to warm the engine up.

 

[cookrd1]

I had a Touring loaner for a little over two weeks. It consistently got in the low 50’s here in central FL. It had about 2k miles on it and my mileage was consistent with what the computer displayed for overall mileage. Given that the Touring has wider tires and is marginally less aero, I was very impressed as I only see low 60’s in HEV mode on my PHEV with no charging.

 

[biffidum]

Not loads of experience, but over our first 2000kms we have averaged 5.6L/100km in our Touring with snow tires on 16” rims. Our average trip is 35km. We do 50% highway driving. I don’t think you could call us hypermilers with the way we drive.

I’m guessing the OP driving habits are extremely aggressive OR there is something wrong with their car.

 

[realto]

I have the 2017 LX, I've averaged >50MPG, including a mid-Atlantic winter not as cold as Canada, but the coldest winter here in decades. My worst tank MPG during winter was 42.x. Best ever was 57.xMPG. I figure roughly a 15% decrease per tankful in winter. Of course the worst is short drives, highway driving in winter is close to same as summer. I've noticed very short drives in winter show "terrible" per trip MPG, but always averages higher for full tank. I've logged all fillups in Fuelly with some notes, if anyone wants to compare.

 

[Jen]

Today is the first time I have been on this site so I apologize that I posted this in another spot. I think this thread might be a better fit.


.....I think the best I have gotten is 43mpg and right now in winter it's around 33mpg (as depressing as the weather). I have a '17 touring which has spent quite a bit of time in the shop, enough to know that the loaner Niro gets about 53mpg with the same driving habits. I would be in heaven if I was getting 50+ on mine. What is causing the drastic difference? The techs where I'm at don't have a clue, they told me I should have the same MPG as the loaner but obviously that isn't the case. Is it that mine is that much heavier as a fully loaded touring compared to the basic loaner? Any thoughts are appreciated. I have used Regular, Premium, and ethanol and none make a noticeable impact either way. I drive 25+ miles each way to work (the majority highway), 65 mph average on the highway. I don't have a lead foot and it's always on ECO. I use to try to coast as much as possible, stay off the gas, etc. to try to bring it up but I have given up. The mileage isn't that much better than my Optima Hybrid was, just wish I had stayed with it. My Niro is more of a problem then it's worth. It's back in the shop as of this morning due to not wanting to start (battery kicked in but nothing more). I will see what the 2019 loaner they gave me gets as I'm sure I will be driving it for a while.

 

[yticolev]

Your loaner had 16" tires versus the 18" on your Touring? EPA says that drops your mpg by 6 mpg. Lighter is always better, but doesn't have a big of an impact as efficient tires. 43 mpg overall is not that unexpected on a Touring, but driving habits make a difference.

Some owners have had injector issues which can cause additional mpg drops but is apparently difficult to diagnose. They don't trigger the engine check light.

Sorry for all your issues! My car has worked fine for 14,000 miles now and I keep my fingers crossed that it doesn't turn into a lemon. Lemons do seem to be rare, but owners with lemons often post online.

 

[Willy Am]

I was wondering what other Niro Touring edition drivers are getting for MPG. I drive the car pretty conservatively and take advantage of the rolling hills to engage EV mode but seems like I only get between 35-42 MPG. I have never gotten the 45 mpg like Kia says the vehicle can get.

Hello

Your comment is true. But the problem is the rim and tires that the touring use. You never will get the same economy than the trims LXS and EX. The problem es the dimension of the tires.The tires of the touring are smallest than the LXS. Your car needs to turn the wheels more times than the LXS at the same speed, and there is where this trim lost the fight about MPG. Analyze de following:
The LXS use RIM 16 with tires 205/60R16 and the touring use RIM18 with tires 205/40R18. When the engine of the LXS running at 4000 rpm, in 6th speed the LXS has the speed of 76.52 M/h, then the Touring with the same engine and transaxle at the same rpm of the engine only can take 72.86 M/h. In other words you are running less distance with the touring than the LXS with the same driving conditions.
One solution is to change the tires mounted from the manufacturer by the model 215/45R18 where has the same (+/-) total height and perimeter of the 205/60R16 used in the LXS.
A good question can be. Why the manufacturer change the RIM in those trims.
The answer is: If you will use the Touring for drive at high speed in the highways, one tire with small heigh of the rubber parts has less possibilities to suffer deformations when the car enter in one sharp curve of the roadway than one tire where the height of the rubber part of the tire is higher, like the LXS has.
Regards
Willyam