Thee Chicago Wolf wrote:
>>Very unlikely that the tires made a HUGE difference or even a
>>significant difference. Most likely you are comparing an apple trip to
>>orange trips and attributing the difference to the tires when other
>>variables are more likely at play.
>
>
> Perhaps, but I kept my controls the same each time. I go to SW
> Wisconsin (200+ miles (one way) from my location, Chicago) at least 4
> times a year and most of the roads out there are 55mph so there isn't
> much room for stop and go acceleration affecting my numbers. No
> jack-rabbit starts or overdrive to pass people either.
>
> I did my tests with cruise control @ 65-70mph and have found that the
> Yokohamas yield me *slightly* better mileage than my OEMs. With the
> OEMs I was getting right around 500-505 miles to a full tank. No apple
> or orange trips here since the conditions of the drive were exactly
> the same. Generally, I drive at night when there's less traffic or
> after the morning rush hour. The conditions are nearly the same every
> time so my numbers are consistent.
>
> With my OEMs, I would average 78-82mpg to a 1/4 tank (city). With my
> Yokos I am getting around 84-86. I've been driving the same route to
> work for 2 years and nothing has changed between point A and point B.
>
> I've put around 14k on my Yokohama's from mid June '05 to present and
> have been keeping a fairly close eye on the before and after. *My*
> experience is that I am getting a little better mileage out of them.

A slight difference is a lot less than a HUGE difference. :-)

Are you sure they are the exact same diameter as the OEM tires. A
change in diameter can also have an effect on computed mileage.

Matt

 

>A slight difference is a lot less than a HUGE difference. :-)
>
>Are you sure they are the exact same diameter as the OEM tires. A
>change in diameter can also have an effect on computed mileage.

Heh, well..some difference is better than none. I'd have to find out
the diameter difference. I have heard that wider diameter tires can
make a vehicle go faster than the speedometer is reading. I would like
to see some scientific evidence to support it though.

- Thee Chicago Wolf

 

>A slight difference is a lot less than a HUGE difference. :-)
>
>Are you sure they are the exact same diameter as the OEM tires. A
>change in diameter can also have an effect on computed mileage.

Heh, well..some difference is better than none. I'd have to find out
the diameter difference. I have heard that wider diameter tires can
make a vehicle go faster than the speedometer is reading. I would like
to see some scientific evidence to support it though.

- Thee Chicago Wolf

 

Thee Chicago Wolf wrote:
> >A slight difference is a lot less than a HUGE difference. :-)
> >
> >Are you sure they are the exact same diameter as the OEM tires. A
> >change in diameter can also have an effect on computed mileage.
>
> Heh, well..some difference is better than none. I'd have to find out
> the diameter difference. I have heard that wider diameter tires can
> make a vehicle go faster than the speedometer is reading. I would like
> to see some scientific evidence to support it though.
>
> - Thee Chicago Wolf

If you change the diameter of the tires you should also change the
aspect ratio. (essentially the height, though the techs can chime in
here with the details) This keeps the speedometer/odometer at least
close to accurate.

For instance, if you have 205/60/16 tires and switch to wider 215
diameter tires, you should also reduce the ratio to 55-series to get
the closest match for your speedometer/odometer. In that case the
speedo will read slightly high, (it will read 60.8 mph when you are
going 60), but it will be as close as you can get without changing
wheel sizes.

If you switch to 215/60/16, which is a common size and in fact the OE
size for the current-generation Sonata---i.e. you switch to a wider
tire but do not change the aspect ratio---you will throw off your
speedo/odo. In this case it's not a huge difference---about 1.8%---but
it's still something.

If you switch from OE 205/60/16 to 215/60/16, your speedomenter will
read 58.9 mph when you are actually going 60 mph. That's per the online
tire size calculator I found here.:
http://www.1010tires.com/TireSizeCal...?action=submit

Also per reviews I've read on tirerack, some tires yield slightly
better fuel economy than others, even if both are brand new and exactly
the same size and type. A rough rule of thumb seems to be that tires
that provide maximum wet/snow traction, even all-season ones, will
yield slightly lower fuel economy. I don't pretend to have expert
insight on that.

Just something to think about.

Regards,
Eric M

 

Thee Chicago Wolf wrote:
> >A slight difference is a lot less than a HUGE difference. :-)
> >
> >Are you sure they are the exact same diameter as the OEM tires. A
> >change in diameter can also have an effect on computed mileage.
>
> Heh, well..some difference is better than none. I'd have to find out
> the diameter difference. I have heard that wider diameter tires can
> make a vehicle go faster than the speedometer is reading. I would like
> to see some scientific evidence to support it though.
>
> - Thee Chicago Wolf

If you change the diameter of the tires you should also change the
aspect ratio. (essentially the height, though the techs can chime in
here with the details) This keeps the speedometer/odometer at least
close to accurate.

For instance, if you have 205/60/16 tires and switch to wider 215
diameter tires, you should also reduce the ratio to 55-series to get
the closest match for your speedometer/odometer. In that case the
speedo will read slightly high, (it will read 60.8 mph when you are
going 60), but it will be as close as you can get without changing
wheel sizes.

If you switch to 215/60/16, which is a common size and in fact the OE
size for the current-generation Sonata---i.e. you switch to a wider
tire but do not change the aspect ratio---you will throw off your
speedo/odo. In this case it's not a huge difference---about 1.8%---but
it's still something.

If you switch from OE 205/60/16 to 215/60/16, your speedomenter will
read 58.9 mph when you are actually going 60 mph. That's per the online
tire size calculator I found here.:
http://www.1010tires.com/TireSizeCal...?action=submit

Also per reviews I've read on tirerack, some tires yield slightly
better fuel economy than others, even if both are brand new and exactly
the same size and type. A rough rule of thumb seems to be that tires
that provide maximum wet/snow traction, even all-season ones, will
yield slightly lower fuel economy. I don't pretend to have expert
insight on that.

Just something to think about.

Regards,
Eric M

 

Mark W. wrote:
> I plan on purchasing a new Sonata (my first Hyundai) and am having trouble
> deciding on the four or six cylinder engine.
>
> Another forum had posts from six cylinder owners who reported dismal
> mileage. One said he averaged 19 mpg!
>
> Is lousy mileage is typical for the six? How does it compare with the four?
>
> Thanks for your help.


I have never owned a Hyundai, but am seriously considering one for my
next car purchase. The reports of less-than-advertised fuel economy
combined with $3/gallon gas have made me switch my focus from the
4-cylinder Sonata to the "mid-size" (per EPA) '07 Elantra, which
supposedly will get 28/36 and have an optional SULEV-rated engine. I am
scratching my head as to why Hyundai has not yet launched the new
Elantra with the fanfare the Sonata and to a lesser extent the Accent
got last year.

Fuel economy seems to be a continuing challenge for Hyundai, even with
the mega-improvements to most of its models in recent years. For some
reason, they just don't stack up to Honda and Toyota in re gas mileage.


Specifically, not only are the EPA estimates slightly lower, but more
importantly a Civic or Corolla will come closer to EPA sticker than
will a Sonata. (that's a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison, but it
holds true among folks I know personally as well as comments I've read
online.)

It all depends on how much you need the extra power compared to the
higher MSRP and the extra cost of fuel and tune-ups. Also the Sonata
V-6 takes 6 quarts of oil, which has caused problems at oil change
time....even at a few Hyundai dealers, per posts I've read here.

If you take long trips in the hills with a carful of family members and
cargo, or if you have to merge onto a busy highway near LA or Houston
each day and then keep up with traffic in the passing lane, the V-6
might be worth it. Otherwise, I'd stick to the 4-cylinder.

Regards,
Eric M

 

Mark W. wrote:
> I plan on purchasing a new Sonata (my first Hyundai) and am having trouble
> deciding on the four or six cylinder engine.
>
> Another forum had posts from six cylinder owners who reported dismal
> mileage. One said he averaged 19 mpg!
>
> Is lousy mileage is typical for the six? How does it compare with the four?
>
> Thanks for your help.


I have never owned a Hyundai, but am seriously considering one for my
next car purchase. The reports of less-than-advertised fuel economy
combined with $3/gallon gas have made me switch my focus from the
4-cylinder Sonata to the "mid-size" (per EPA) '07 Elantra, which
supposedly will get 28/36 and have an optional SULEV-rated engine. I am
scratching my head as to why Hyundai has not yet launched the new
Elantra with the fanfare the Sonata and to a lesser extent the Accent
got last year.

Fuel economy seems to be a continuing challenge for Hyundai, even with
the mega-improvements to most of its models in recent years. For some
reason, they just don't stack up to Honda and Toyota in re gas mileage.


Specifically, not only are the EPA estimates slightly lower, but more
importantly a Civic or Corolla will come closer to EPA sticker than
will a Sonata. (that's a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison, but it
holds true among folks I know personally as well as comments I've read
online.)

It all depends on how much you need the extra power compared to the
higher MSRP and the extra cost of fuel and tune-ups. Also the Sonata
V-6 takes 6 quarts of oil, which has caused problems at oil change
time....even at a few Hyundai dealers, per posts I've read here.

If you take long trips in the hills with a carful of family members and
cargo, or if you have to merge onto a busy highway near LA or Houston
each day and then keep up with traffic in the passing lane, the V-6
might be worth it. Otherwise, I'd stick to the 4-cylinder.

Regards,
Eric M

 

Thee Chicago Wolf wrote:

>>A slight difference is a lot less than a HUGE difference. :-)
>>
>>Are you sure they are the exact same diameter as the OEM tires. A
>>change in diameter can also have an effect on computed mileage.
>
>
> Heh, well..some difference is better than none. I'd have to find out
> the diameter difference. I have heard that wider diameter tires can
> make a vehicle go faster than the speedometer is reading. I would like
> to see some scientific evidence to support it though.

I'm not sure what you mean by wider diameter. Width and diameter are
two different dimensions on a tire. A wider tire isn't likely to change
the rolling radius much. A tire with a greater diameter will change the
rolling radius proportional to the change in diameter compared to the
OEM tires. So, if your new tires are smaller in diameter than the OEM
tires, they will make more revolutions per mile. This means that your
odometer will record more miles per actual mile traveled. So let's say,
for example, that your new tires are 5% smaller in diameter than the
originals. Your odometer will now record ~105 miles for every 100
actual miles driven. Let's say that before you used 4 gallons for 100
miles or got 25 MPG. Let's say you still use 4 gallons per 100 actual
miles. You will have recorded 105 miles on your odometer so when you
compute your MPG, it will be 26.25 MPG. However, this is a fictitious
number as you really only traveled 100 miles and you really are still
getting 25 MPG. So the tires didn't give you better mileage, they just
give you the appearance of beter mileage.


Matt

 

Thee Chicago Wolf wrote:

>>A slight difference is a lot less than a HUGE difference. :-)
>>
>>Are you sure they are the exact same diameter as the OEM tires. A
>>change in diameter can also have an effect on computed mileage.
>
>
> Heh, well..some difference is better than none. I'd have to find out
> the diameter difference. I have heard that wider diameter tires can
> make a vehicle go faster than the speedometer is reading. I would like
> to see some scientific evidence to support it though.

I'm not sure what you mean by wider diameter. Width and diameter are
two different dimensions on a tire. A wider tire isn't likely to change
the rolling radius much. A tire with a greater diameter will change the
rolling radius proportional to the change in diameter compared to the
OEM tires. So, if your new tires are smaller in diameter than the OEM
tires, they will make more revolutions per mile. This means that your
odometer will record more miles per actual mile traveled. So let's say,
for example, that your new tires are 5% smaller in diameter than the
originals. Your odometer will now record ~105 miles for every 100
actual miles driven. Let's say that before you used 4 gallons for 100
miles or got 25 MPG. Let's say you still use 4 gallons per 100 actual
miles. You will have recorded 105 miles on your odometer so when you
compute your MPG, it will be 26.25 MPG. However, this is a fictitious
number as you really only traveled 100 miles and you really are still
getting 25 MPG. So the tires didn't give you better mileage, they just
give you the appearance of beter mileage.


Matt

 

Eric wrote:

> Thee Chicago Wolf wrote:
>
>>>A slight difference is a lot less than a HUGE difference. :-)
>>>
>>>Are you sure they are the exact same diameter as the OEM tires. A
>>>change in diameter can also have an effect on computed mileage.
>>
>>Heh, well..some difference is better than none. I'd have to find out
>>the diameter difference. I have heard that wider diameter tires can
>>make a vehicle go faster than the speedometer is reading. I would like
>>to see some scientific evidence to support it though.
>>
>>- Thee Chicago Wolf
>
>
> If you change the diameter of the tires you should also change the
> aspect ratio. (essentially the height, though the techs can chime in
> here with the details) This keeps the speedometer/odometer at least
> close to accurate.

I think you meant width above rather than diameter. If you change the
diameter, your speedometer/odometer will read the wrong value no matter
what the aspect ratio is as changing that will only change the width
given that you've already changed, and thus fixed, the diameter.


Matt

 

Eric wrote:

> Thee Chicago Wolf wrote:
>
>>>A slight difference is a lot less than a HUGE difference. :-)
>>>
>>>Are you sure they are the exact same diameter as the OEM tires. A
>>>change in diameter can also have an effect on computed mileage.
>>
>>Heh, well..some difference is better than none. I'd have to find out
>>the diameter difference. I have heard that wider diameter tires can
>>make a vehicle go faster than the speedometer is reading. I would like
>>to see some scientific evidence to support it though.
>>
>>- Thee Chicago Wolf
>
>
> If you change the diameter of the tires you should also change the
> aspect ratio. (essentially the height, though the techs can chime in
> here with the details) This keeps the speedometer/odometer at least
> close to accurate.

I think you meant width above rather than diameter. If you change the
diameter, your speedometer/odometer will read the wrong value no matter
what the aspect ratio is as changing that will only change the width
given that you've already changed, and thus fixed, the diameter.


Matt

 

Eric wrote:

> Mark W. wrote:
>
>>I plan on purchasing a new Sonata (my first Hyundai) and am having trouble
>>deciding on the four or six cylinder engine.
>>
>>Another forum had posts from six cylinder owners who reported dismal
>>mileage. One said he averaged 19 mpg!
>>
>>Is lousy mileage is typical for the six? How does it compare with the four?
>>
>>Thanks for your help.
>
>
>
> I have never owned a Hyundai, but am seriously considering one for my
> next car purchase. The reports of less-than-advertised fuel economy
> combined with $3/gallon gas have made me switch my focus from the
> 4-cylinder Sonata to the "mid-size" (per EPA) '07 Elantra, which
> supposedly will get 28/36 and have an optional SULEV-rated engine. I am
> scratching my head as to why Hyundai has not yet launched the new
> Elantra with the fanfare the Sonata and to a lesser extent the Accent
> got last year.
>
> Fuel economy seems to be a continuing challenge for Hyundai, even with
> the mega-improvements to most of its models in recent years. For some
> reason, they just don't stack up to Honda and Toyota in re gas mileage.

I believe that GM is the only other car maker that competes well with
Toyota and Honda with respect to engine efficiency. Hyundai still seems
to lag a little. My best MPG with my Sonata on a trip was 32 MPG, still
2 below the EPA highway average. My other two vehicles will almost
exactly match their highway ratings on a trip.


> Specifically, not only are the EPA estimates slightly lower, but more
> importantly a Civic or Corolla will come closer to EPA sticker than
> will a Sonata. (that's a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison, but it
> holds true among folks I know personally as well as comments I've read
> online.)

It seems to hold true in most road tests as well. The Toyota models
almost always come out the best in "real world" mileage achieved.


> It all depends on how much you need the extra power compared to the
> higher MSRP and the extra cost of fuel and tune-ups. Also the Sonata
> V-6 takes 6 quarts of oil, which has caused problems at oil change
> time....even at a few Hyundai dealers, per posts I've read here.
>
> If you take long trips in the hills with a carful of family members and
> cargo, or if you have to merge onto a busy highway near LA or Houston
> each day and then keep up with traffic in the passing lane, the V-6
> might be worth it. Otherwise, I'd stick to the 4-cylinder.

I agree. I'm very satisfied with the power of the 4 cylinder in my
Sonata. My only regrets are the sensitive throttle and clutch (mostly
the throttle). It is the only car I've ever owned that can induce a
nasty PIO if you get on a bumpy road of just the right frequency. It
takes very little movement of the foot to get a big response from the
engine.

Matt

 

Eric wrote:

> Mark W. wrote:
>
>>I plan on purchasing a new Sonata (my first Hyundai) and am having trouble
>>deciding on the four or six cylinder engine.
>>
>>Another forum had posts from six cylinder owners who reported dismal
>>mileage. One said he averaged 19 mpg!
>>
>>Is lousy mileage is typical for the six? How does it compare with the four?
>>
>>Thanks for your help.
>
>
>
> I have never owned a Hyundai, but am seriously considering one for my
> next car purchase. The reports of less-than-advertised fuel economy
> combined with $3/gallon gas have made me switch my focus from the
> 4-cylinder Sonata to the "mid-size" (per EPA) '07 Elantra, which
> supposedly will get 28/36 and have an optional SULEV-rated engine. I am
> scratching my head as to why Hyundai has not yet launched the new
> Elantra with the fanfare the Sonata and to a lesser extent the Accent
> got last year.
>
> Fuel economy seems to be a continuing challenge for Hyundai, even with
> the mega-improvements to most of its models in recent years. For some
> reason, they just don't stack up to Honda and Toyota in re gas mileage.

I believe that GM is the only other car maker that competes well with
Toyota and Honda with respect to engine efficiency. Hyundai still seems
to lag a little. My best MPG with my Sonata on a trip was 32 MPG, still
2 below the EPA highway average. My other two vehicles will almost
exactly match their highway ratings on a trip.


> Specifically, not only are the EPA estimates slightly lower, but more
> importantly a Civic or Corolla will come closer to EPA sticker than
> will a Sonata. (that's a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison, but it
> holds true among folks I know personally as well as comments I've read
> online.)

It seems to hold true in most road tests as well. The Toyota models
almost always come out the best in "real world" mileage achieved.


> It all depends on how much you need the extra power compared to the
> higher MSRP and the extra cost of fuel and tune-ups. Also the Sonata
> V-6 takes 6 quarts of oil, which has caused problems at oil change
> time....even at a few Hyundai dealers, per posts I've read here.
>
> If you take long trips in the hills with a carful of family members and
> cargo, or if you have to merge onto a busy highway near LA or Houston
> each day and then keep up with traffic in the passing lane, the V-6
> might be worth it. Otherwise, I'd stick to the 4-cylinder.

I agree. I'm very satisfied with the power of the 4 cylinder in my
Sonata. My only regrets are the sensitive throttle and clutch (mostly
the throttle). It is the only car I've ever owned that can induce a
nasty PIO if you get on a bumpy road of just the right frequency. It
takes very little movement of the foot to get a big response from the
engine.

Matt

 

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Eric wrote:
>
> > Thee Chicago Wolf wrote:
> >
> >>>A slight difference is a lot less than a HUGE difference. :-)
> >>>
> >>>Are you sure they are the exact same diameter as the OEM tires. A
> >>>change in diameter can also have an effect on computed mileage.
> >>
> >>Heh, well..some difference is better than none. I'd have to find out
> >>the diameter difference. I have heard that wider diameter tires can
> >>make a vehicle go faster than the speedometer is reading. I would like
> >>to see some scientific evidence to support it though.
> >>
> >>- Thee Chicago Wolf
> >
> >
> > If you change the diameter of the tires you should also change the
> > aspect ratio. (essentially the height, though the techs can chime in
> > here with the details) This keeps the speedometer/odometer at least
> > close to accurate.
>
> I think you meant width above rather than diameter. If you change the
> diameter, your speedometer/odometer will read the wrong value no matter
> what the aspect ratio is as changing that will only change the width
> given that you've already changed, and thus fixed, the diameter.
>

Yes, width is correct, not diameter. Oops. Don't ask me how I came up
with that one....Thanks for setting us straight.

ERM

 

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Eric wrote:
>
> > Thee Chicago Wolf wrote:
> >
> >>>A slight difference is a lot less than a HUGE difference. :-)
> >>>
> >>>Are you sure they are the exact same diameter as the OEM tires. A
> >>>change in diameter can also have an effect on computed mileage.
> >>
> >>Heh, well..some difference is better than none. I'd have to find out
> >>the diameter difference. I have heard that wider diameter tires can
> >>make a vehicle go faster than the speedometer is reading. I would like
> >>to see some scientific evidence to support it though.
> >>
> >>- Thee Chicago Wolf
> >
> >
> > If you change the diameter of the tires you should also change the
> > aspect ratio. (essentially the height, though the techs can chime in
> > here with the details) This keeps the speedometer/odometer at least
> > close to accurate.
>
> I think you meant width above rather than diameter. If you change the
> diameter, your speedometer/odometer will read the wrong value no matter
> what the aspect ratio is as changing that will only change the width
> given that you've already changed, and thus fixed, the diameter.
>

Yes, width is correct, not diameter. Oops. Don't ask me how I came up
with that one....Thanks for setting us straight.

ERM