MY100thcar

This is my first hybrid and I drive the same as any other car I had.
I have no problem getting 40MPG, but I do NOT drive with a heavy foot.
Slow accel to speed is always better.
As for lower MPG with cold temps. I will find out soon and post.

ElliotB

"Slow accel to speed is always better."

Actually this is not quite true. Once the ICE kicks in, FE is about the same accelerating slowly or briskly. So ideally, once you are no longer running in EV mode, getting up to cruising speed quickly where you get the highest efficiency can actually help increase MPGs.

Slackbus

This morning on my way in to work I was very careful to never enter the "Power" zone, except for two on ramps where there wasn't enough merge lane to try that. Then on the highway I set to cruise at the speed limit. I noticed that I going downhill I wasn't losing speed and I was not using any fuel... that was something I could not do with the pedal (its one extreme or the other, even with light touch).

Managed to get 6.7 L / 100km ( 35mpg) this morning! With 0C/32F , heated seat and steering wheel, heaters, etc., this might be the best I'm going to get with the hills I have on my commute and its relatively short distance (12mi/18km with 50/50 city/highway).

The engineer in me is curious though... My100thCar - what do you consider heavy foot? Let's use something we can measure -- where does your ECO gauge read as you accelerate from a stoplight.

BikrMike -- I'm in Kitchener. Thanks for the tip, I'll look into getting a block heater installed... maybe when I go back for my 1600km checkup.

BikrMike

OMG Slackbus, I live in Guelph and I'm a retired Mech. Eng. (2 yrs now) also trying to maximize mileage. I bought my ES300h from Heffner last month. I suspect you did also. I expect I'll have the 1st ES300h in Guelph when it arrives at month's end. I have yet to see a 2013 ES let alone hybrid version in the area.

If you wish we could PM if you want to compare notes.

MY100thcar

Like I said before I do NOT drive any different with my hybrid.
I do not use the speed control, for more than one reason, & yes it uses more fuel.

I usually get better mpg on any of my cars compared to the window sticker..... Do you?... If you don't then you will not with the ES300h. either.

My ECO gauge goes in the power zone, (but not for too long) you can not help that.

By heavy foot I mean I don't always have to beat the car next to me at a light,or rush; meaning heavy foot up to the next light just to wait for it to turn green,or rush up to the car ahead and get on his ***, (I don't tail gate), or rush to get up to hwy. speed, I stay in the right lane till I reach my speed.
On a 3 lane hwy. I usually stay in the middle lane, on the main 65mph hwys. here most cars go 78 to 85mph, I stay under 75,

Slackbus

I don't typically use cruise either, actually I think its [more than] a bit dangerous in busy traffic... but I was curious of the results.
With previous cars I always achieved the rated city mileage. Considering my total driving ends up being mostly city, that's not bad.
Your definition of heavy foot is generous, and your speeds are reasonable, so I hope that most of the mileage difference between us currently is geographic (both temperature and elevation changes). Looking forward to continuing to track results!

BikrMike - I haven't seen a single 3rd Gen ES either, not even in the T****A parking lot where I work
You're right, I bought mine at Heffner. Got lucky though, the color and package I wanted had just arrived, so I was able to go into the back lot and sit in it and test the ML audio before signing.

TomKimR

2nd fillup on my one week old 300h, display showed 33.8 mpg, but calculated the regular way of miles/gals the mpg came out to 35.9. I am experimenting with the drive modes, this week being all ECO. Next week I'll use normal/regular mode. I expect the mpg to improve hereon. My RX450h, which I traded for the ES, got around 26 most of the time, once getting 29 on a long trip. So far I am impressed with the features on the ES.

KennyLexus

I always thought that using the cruise control helped your mpg.

MY100thcar

Sometimes it can, but only if the hwy.is level & traffic is very light.
One example:
Say the speed limit is 65mph... It will waste a lot fuel going up hills,because it keeps your car@ what you set it,say 77mph to do that It has to increase the gas flow a lot most of the time downshifiing.... Without it you see a hill ahead and increase the gas lightly before the hill to gain some speed then going up the hill you gas it lightly letting the car go slow down to say appox. 62- 65mph (if need be).

Slackbus

100% true, all depends on road conditions. However, if you are on reasonably flat road, the computer will give you a more steady throttle control than the foot. At least, that's very true for me. Even if I kept my speedometer constant, the revs are higher by foot than by cruise. Same for my old car as this one.

KennyLexus

I don't understand why engineers haven't figured out how to modulate cruise control throttle up hills. My car sometimes accelerates like mad up hills. Anyway, does anyone know how the '13 with CVT drives with cruise control (especially up hills)?

Slackbus

It's accelerates and maintains a stable speed up hills. It's maintains speed within a very small +/- , so plan to see the regen and battery get a workout during normal drives.

Yesterday I drove in sport mode all day. Wow, I forgot how much more fun the car is that way! Even better, I got amazing mileage! Perhaps its because the extra torque of using the battery assist more is in tune with my driving. I was able drive highway conditions with medium traffic at 6.5l/100km (36mpg) and after when driving city traffic (I reset the read out in between) I attained 4.7l/100km (50mpg)! That was over only a 10km drive, with a nicely warmed engine. And I didn't require significant driving differences compared to the other drivers on the road.

Very interesting, this car.

gfr1

I decided to check the accuracy of the fuel quantity and computer system with my first tank of fuel. I nearly over-played my hand, as my experience with Japanese vehicles is that they are very conservative with such measurements. Only the fuel mpg computer fit that mold. My first refuel was at 675 miles, or 668.4 on the tank. The refuel to the filler neck took 17.312 gallons, or 38.6 mpg. The computer said 40.0, so I have to multiply my indicated mpg of 40.0 by 0.965, to get the true value of 38.6. I’m guessing that most similar configured vehicles will have comparable value accuracy, other than the observed mpg, which is sensitive to user and environment. That’s why I thought I’d post this.
2013 Lexus ES300h; Standard 17’ wheels w/Michelin Primacy MXV4 – P215/55R17 93V tires. Received 09/29/12, w/tires inflated to 40 PSI, at around 80° ambient temp. Today, 11/12/12, they were 36 psi, at 45° F ambient (N. Fort Worth, TX). Reset tire warning at 36 psi. Received car at 6 miles odometer. Refueled at 7 miles (to top of filler neck) for a starting point. Reset all fuel computers and trip odometer. I used a RaceLogic precision GPS (as used by vehicle test programs) with a temporary rooftop antenna, for speedometer calibration. The speedometer is consistent up to 70 mph, which is as fast as I cruised, so far. The GPS readout is to two decimal places and the speedometer reads 0.25 mph fast. I have to put the tip of the pointer at the top of the major indices, for calibrated speeds, 30 thru 70. Quite good. When I parked at the refuel pump, the fuel gage was centered at “E”, on the Empty indices. When I was about six miles from the station, the instrument cluster reading said that I had 10 miles of range. When I parked at the pump, it wasn’t reading a value, but said “Please refuel”! Believe it! After refuel, it said that I had 655 miles range. I drove 2.7 miles home and the readout was 55.9 mpg for that segment. Most of the driving was local commuter type, with a little bit of 70mph freeway. About 500 miles of A/C, 100 miles Vent and the rest with heater & no A/C. Most of the terrain is gently low rolling hills, with lots of traffic. The car doesn’t mind those things, but I can tell that fast cruising (80 mph limits in West Texas) will take the numbers down. I’m guessing, maybe 34 mpg there? Even though some brochures say the tank holds 17.2 gallons, the official manuals say 17.0. I’m guessing that the filler neck might hold 0.5 gallons, or so, which allows for my 17.312 refuel. I got by with one!

Neoxagon

You can also check other people's MPG on the EPA site.

https://www.clublexus.com/forums/es3...a-website.html

ElliotB

Most overpasses/hills have 2 sides. What you loose going up in fuel economy, you gain (most of it) going down). The net loss is minimal and will typically not affect overall fuel economy on a trip.