Here is a good test of city MPG for any car. When you take your test drive click in the avg fuel economy and see what it reads as an average. You will be astonished to see that usually it is well below city MPG in most cases.
It includes the MPGs of all testers before you so hard acceleration, city, freeway, idling in the lot, etc. In other words, routine everyday driving. The I4 that I test drove (and bought) had 13 miles on it and had 19 MPG showing-what happened to the 26 city figure? The Altima had 20 MPG at 138 miles on the odo. My Accord now has 575 miles and avg MPG of 28.7 on the computer and a measured at the tank MPG of 29.4. I am hitting 40 mpg on the freeway not as a temporary reading but on two 70 mile trips. This Friday, I am heading to Niagra falls and will do 750 miles fully loaded so expect a full report.
When test checking MPG, if the 6 has been driven several hundred miles on the freeway and the 4 only 20 miles in the city with 30 min idling on the lot, the 6 will have far better MPG so you have to compare cars with relative miles assuming they routinely go on a similar test drive loop.
Since MPG is a big factor for you, check your own MPG on the test loop for each car and drive them the way you normally would for at least 15-20 miles. Do a 65mph freeway stint to get a clue on best freeway MPG. I predict 33 MPG freeway for the 6 and 40 MPG for the 4. If the difference is small (say only 3 MPG) and money is no object, go for the 6 but I doubt it will do 29-30 combined like my 4 does in the real world.
I can do the conversion via Google very quickly but you're killing me bro with the L/100KM
Sorry for the long post ....
Here is what I have learned testing cars and observing mpg: The Canadian ratings are unachievable. I've written Transport Canada and after 12 months received a response saying that they can't simply follow the US EPA ratings, but must do their own investigation and update the Canadian ratings as they determine. That was 2 years ago. So I use the EPA site.
All of my test drives are done firstly in the city and then on the highway. I drive a typical route in the city and then drive the speed limit on the highway (100 km/h to 62 mph). I reset the average fuel economy computer at the start of my road test and again before I head out on the highway. Most people are test pilots on road tests wanting to know "what a car can do" on the road. That isn't typical driving, so I don't want it as part of my sample.
In the past couple of years I've tested a Mercedes GL320 Blu Tec, BMW X5 X35d (diesel), Honda Odyssey (5 Speed), BMW 535i X drive. All were driven in the city for about 45 minutes in light traffic with some stop and go. All of the computers showed within 1 - 2 mpg of the EPA rating. I finally bought a 2011 Odyssey - 5 Speed for our family car and we've had it 18 months. It is EPA rated at 13.1 L/100 in the city (18 mpg - US). In the summer, on my commute and around town I use 12.5 - 13.0 L/100 km. In the winter I use up to 14 L/100 km. I attribute this to the VCM system not working until the engine and transmission are warm in the winter.
I didn't reset the V6's fuel consumption computer when I test drove on Friday so I can't say whether the car will hit it's rating. It is also a bit misleading anyway as most cars take several thousand miles before they are worked in and can get their fuel economy rating (if in fact they are able to achieve it at all).
I can't say whether the new Honda's will make their rating in the city or on the highway. Anecdotal evidence from drivers such as you are helpful, but again, if you cruise at 70 -m 75 mph, I doubt the car would, because they aren't tested at those speeds and as we all know the faster you drive the more fuel you use.
The EPA says the 4 cyl will get 27/36 and the 6 cyl will get 21/32. Transport Canada says the V6 will get 50 mpg on the highway (for a Canadian gallon which is 20% larger). Adjusted for a US gallon, that means 43 mpg to a US gallon on the highway. You can see the problem with Transport Canada's numbers.
Anyway, assuming the EPA is correct and the car's fuel economy computer is correct (when I test it) and if the two agree, based on driving 10,000 miles a year and at our gas cost/gallon in Canada for regular and assuming 85% City and 15% highway, the EPA site calculates I'd use $1,700/annum in fuel for the 4 Cylinder and $2,150/annum for the 6 cylinder model. I make that to be $450/year or $37.50/month.
I'll test drive the 4 Cyl this week for an hour to see how it fares in acceleration on the highway and in town, engine noise levels under acceleration and displayed fuel economy (as a general guide). I'm not opposed to the 4 Cyl, especially because in Canada we get a 4 cyl Touring model and I like some toys. I'm a bit nervous about new technology though (CVT) and I have to say we have some transmission or motor mount or torque convertor vibration on our 2011 Odyssey which no one seems to be able to diagnose (dealer either says they can't feel it or it's normal depending on which dealer I take it to). In addition it has started to shake the steering wheel slightly when I am driving straight ahead and then turn the wheel to the left to change lanes. I'm thinking either a tire, tie rod end or CV joint. Either way (except for the tire) I don't expect problems like this at 18,000 miles. So for me, maybe the 6 speed auto is the safer choice. On the other hand the CVT may turn out to be bullet proof.
If the 4 cylinder can get me where I need to go without too much fuss (and noise) accelerating briskly when I need to and it has enough passing power on the highway, then I'd likely opt for the 4 Cylinder model and save $5000. I have my eye on a slightly used Boxster anyway and I'm sure I could get my summer driving thrills in that car. Now I just need to figure out where to park the 1976 Triumph TR6.
