PDA

View Full Version : mileage concerns?



MandiB
11-13-2007, 04:42 PM
I really want this car. I have since driving an FX for 10 days this spring, but then telling my husband that I just wanted it to be a bit smaller. Voila, Infiniti announces this one!

Only, I was hoping that it would also be more fuel efficent than my current BMW X5. It's not really....:(

Is it reasonable to think that it should've been more fuel efficent? Is this something they might change in the future? I'm just curious if anybody else noticed this and is concerned.

I'm a chick, yep, and this is geared towards chicks right ;)? So maybe all you guys aren't bothered by it. Or maybe you are?

I looked at the RDX and the Lexus Hybrid RX, just because of the mileage, but I just love how the interior of this EX looks...and it's cute exterior! I'm so torn.

I've got a contact at my dealer who will call me as soon as they've got one to drive.

jzr28
11-13-2007, 05:22 PM
HI - You said you were looking at the RDX for fuel milage and it gets, per Edmunds, 19/23 and the EX35 gets 17/24 ,best guess,which falls in line with all of the Infinit V6's and close to the RDX. Really not bad for 300 horse power and the weight of the CUV. I don't feel that is too bad considering what you get for 17/24. I don't think you will get much in the upper levels of CUV/SUV in gas milage compared to the lower levels such as a Honda. Good luck in your search and maybe it will end up with an EX!!!! ;)

MandiB
11-13-2007, 06:16 PM
Thanks. That's what I was wondering...if I'd find anything with better mileage. But I guess not. Maybe once I drive the EX I won't care so much. I'm sure I'll fall in love with it!

4U4ME
11-13-2007, 08:23 PM
also Nissan/Infiniti MPG are more accurate than Honda/Acura and Toyota/Lexus...
they may say they get more MPG, but their real world MPG sucks

NSE70
11-13-2007, 09:12 PM
also Nissan/Infiniti MPG are more accurate than Honda/Acura and Toyota/Lexus...
they may say they get more MPG, but their real world MPG sucks
The US government is conspiring against Nissan! Oh noes!

jzr28
11-13-2007, 09:34 PM
Thanks. That's what I was wondering...if I'd find anything with better mileage. But I guess not. Maybe once I drive the EX I won't care so much. I'm sure I'll fall in love with it!

In an SUV/CUV I think "good" mileage is set by the person :). Some think 17/24 is wonderful and others think it is poor. IMO I belive that the EX35 is OK and as soon as they come out I hope to soon be driving one.... if the rumor of the Tech package being delayed is not true :). I am sure you will enjoy it and be a happy gal!!!!

Darth62
11-14-2007, 02:51 AM
HI - You said you were looking at the RDX for fuel milage and it gets, per Edmunds, 19/23 and the EX35 gets 17/24 ,best guess,which falls in line with all of the Infinit V6's and close to the RDX. Really not bad for 300 horse power and the weight of the CUV. I don't feel that is too bad considering what you get for 17/24. I don't think you will get much in the upper levels of CUV/SUV in gas milage compared to the lower levels such as a Honda. Good luck in your search and maybe it will end up with an EX!!!! ;)

The numbers reported in EDMUNDS are prior to the government change in MPG. As you all know, the new MPG figures are stricter. Here, you've got the 2007 RDX numbers vs the 2008 EX35 numbers.

Here are the 2008 numbers for a few vehicles in the class (in cases where there were multiple engines, I give you the smallest engine - which is the most efficient):

Acura
RDX 17/22
MDX 15/20

Audi
Q7 14/20

BMW
X3 17/24
X5 15/32

Caddy
SRX 14/22

Mazda
CX7 16/22

Subbie
Tribeca 16/21

Toyota
Rav4 V6 19/26


With the exception of the the Toyota, the Infiniti is competitive with any small SUV out there in terms of fuel economy.

NSE70
11-14-2007, 03:30 AM
You sure won't be cross shopping a Rav4 interior with a EX35 interior.

The 2008 BMW X5 3.0i is 15/21/18.
The 2008 Infiniti EX35 is 17/24/20?.
That's 13.8 % more fuel efficient.
The difference between a midsized sedan (25 mpg) and a compact sedan (29 mpg) is 16%. (but note compact sedans get much smaller engines.)
So the EX35 is sort of appropriately more fuel efficient for being a smaller size.

EX35
11-14-2007, 08:18 AM
I think if gas mileage is an issue at this price point, perhaps going to the next lower level and looking at a 4 cyl or hybrid might be more practical.

Darth62
11-14-2007, 12:19 PM
I think if gas mileage is an issue at this price point, perhaps going to the next lower level and looking at a 4 cyl or hybrid might be more practical.
I'll strongly disagree with this (without meaning to flame). I am fortunate to be in a position where I can easily afford a vehicle in this class. And, I could obviously afford to pay the fuel costs and other upkeep costs without any problem. That doesn't mean I don't care about the environment, nor does it mean that I like to have to refill the tank every three days, nor does it mean I enjoy being putting money into the pocket of oil companies.

MPG can and should be an issue for buyers at all levels. Being socially responsible and wanting a car that gets decent milage does not mean that the only suitable vehicle for you is a 4-cyl or hybrid though . There are reasonable compromises.

Consider, again, the MPG on a Toyota RAV4. It has a crappy interior and will never handle or brake as well as the EX35. But, it will offer very similar acceleration with much better fuel economy. That is the kind of benchmark Infiniti should target.

I'm not saying fuel economy will rule out the EX35 for me, but it is a consideration. And, it is perfectly appropriate for it to be a consideration for the original poster.

Even more to the point: it doens't matter what you or I think is important. Each owner has their own set of priorities. And, if the orignal poster wants to consider MPG as a criteria in her purchase of an sporty upscale CUV, more power to her.

EX35
11-14-2007, 02:50 PM
You disagree with what? Is anything I said untrue? The person is already driving an X5 for cripes sake.

My point is that if you are questioning the gas mileage, you should look elsewhere. There are other options.

This engine has been rated at the current numbers for awhile. To get more mpgs, you will need to get a vehicle with a smaller engine or a hybrid...as I suggested.

Infiniti will offer hybrid options in the future...just not now.

Darth62
11-14-2007, 04:14 PM
You disagree with what? Is anything I said untrue? The person is already driving an X5 for cripes sake.

My point is that if you are questioning the gas mileage, you should look elsewhere. There are other options.

This engine has been rated at the current numbers for awhile. To get more mpgs, you will need to get a vehicle with a smaller engine or a hybrid...as I suggested.

Infiniti will offer hybrid options in the future...just not now.

I don't agree that a potential owner can't have MPG be a major factor on their mind, and still look at vehicles in this class. I'm seriously considering an Infiniti myself (if not a EX35, perhaps one of the sedans) and MPG is a very signficant issue to me and an issue I give a lot of thought.

I recognized that I have misinterpreted your post (for which I apologize), but this entire issues reminds me of these threads that pop up every once in a while with some poster asking if the VQ35 really requires premium. Inevitably, somebody shoots back saying that "if you can afford a vehicle in this class, you shouldn't be worried about paying 20 cents extra for a gallon of gas." I don't buy that. Just because we all have resources, doesn't mean we are happy about having to shell out more than drivers of nonpremium vehicles just to drive to work.

So, to sum, I'm looking at Infiniti vehicles very seriously. But, like the original poster I'm worried about fuel economy and that is a very serious issue I'll have to take into account when I make my purchase choice.

wysguymd
11-14-2007, 05:00 PM
Inevitably, somebody shoots back saying that "if you can afford a vehicle in this class, you shouldn't be worried about paying 20 cents extra for a gallon of gas." I don't buy that. Just because we all have resources, doesn't mean we are happy about having to shell out more than drivers of nonpremium vehicles just to drive to work.

I can not agree more with your comment! Just because I can afford a $40k+ vehicle does not mean I want to pay more for gas - whether b/c of poor mileage or premium fuel. If I'm paying $40k+ for a car, the car SHOULD get good gas mileage!

All automakers should be focused more on better gas mileage and be less concerned about 0-60 times. I'd much rather give up a few ponies and get 26-28mph in everyday driving and still be in a luxury car.

Darth62
11-14-2007, 06:16 PM
I can not agree more with your comment! Just because I can afford a $40k+ vehicle does not mean I want to pay more for gas - whether b/c of poor mileage or premium fuel. If I'm paying $40k+ for a car, the car SHOULD get good gas mileage!

All automakers should be focused more on better gas mileage and be less concerned about 0-60 times. I'd much rather give up a few ponies and get 26-28mph in everyday driving and still be in a luxury car.

These issues get especially annoying when poor MPG, or premium gas requirements, have no real benifit for the car owner.

Consider my current vehicle, an Acura TSX. Acura wants to be able to advertise that the engine gets 205 hp, so they pump up the compression ratio. As a result, I get relativley poor gas mileage and I need to use premium gas. The American Honda Accord has the same basic engine, with but with a lower compression. It uses regular gas and gets better gas mileage. But, the 0-60 times are the same for the two vehicles (at least according to Consumer Reports) because the additional HP in my car is all available at RPM that are higher than 3500. The end result: No preformance gains for me, but higher cost to own. The only winner in the equation is Acura, who gains an important marketing tool.

wysguymd
11-15-2007, 10:29 AM
Consider my current vehicle, an Acura TSX. Acura wants to be able to advertise that the engine gets 205 hp, so they pump up the compression ratio. As a result, I get relativley poor gas mileage and I need to use premium gas.

I am currently driving a TSX too! However, I think it gets great gas mileage. I get 26-27mpg in everyday mixed driving, 35 on highway road trips. I also rarely fill up with premium fuel and drive approx 20,000mi/year.

I really want to get an EX next, but the small backseat and estimated gas mileage is making me hesitate. I test drove an RDX twice and didn't care for the interior - and gas mileage (which if I recall correctly was better than the EX).

Darth62
11-15-2007, 11:50 AM
I am currently driving a TSX too! However, I think it gets great gas mileage. I get 26-27mpg in everyday mixed driving, 35 on highway road trips. I also rarely fill up with premium fuel and drive approx 20,000mi/year.

I really want to get an EX next, but the small backseat and estimated gas mileage is making me hesitate. I test drove an RDX twice and didn't care for the interior - and gas mileage (which if I recall correctly was better than the EX).

I liked the RDX OK. But, I find so-so gas milage more acceptable if it is with Nissans sweet 3.5 V6 than with a Turbo 4 banger.

EX35
11-15-2007, 09:11 PM
I don't agree that a potential owner can't have MPG be a major factor on their mind, and still look at vehicles in this class. I'm seriously considering an Infiniti myself (if not a EX35, perhaps one of the sedans) and MPG is a very signficant issue to me and an issue I give a lot of thought.

I recognized that I have misinterpreted your post (for which I apologize), but this entire issues reminds me of these threads that pop up every once in a while with some poster asking if the VQ35 really requires premium. Inevitably, somebody shoots back saying that "if you can afford a vehicle in this class, you shouldn't be worried about paying 20 cents extra for a gallon of gas." I don't buy that. Just because we all have resources, doesn't mean we are happy about having to shell out more than drivers of nonpremium vehicles just to drive to work.

So, to sum, I'm looking at Infiniti vehicles very seriously. But, like the original poster I'm worried about fuel economy and that is a very serious issue I'll have to take into account when I make my purchase choice.

What it really comes down to is if you are willing to pay that 'premium' to have to use premium fuel at those mpg ratings. Virtually all vehicles in this class require premium. I've purchased 5 vehicles in the last 9 years and they have all required premium fuel. But, I bought what I wanted.

Darth62
11-16-2007, 02:50 AM
What it really comes down to is if you are willing to pay that 'premium' to have to use premium fuel at those mpg ratings. Virtually all vehicles in this class require premium. I've purchased 5 vehicles in the last 9 years and they have all required premium fuel. But, I bought what I wanted.

Am I wiling? Yes. Do I see it as a serious disadvantage and wish Infiniti/Acura/Lexus would make it a priority to built engines that run on regular? Absolutely.

Again, just because I can afford gas costs for a vehicle with low MPG that burns premimum gas, doesn't mean I like it.

All vehicle purchase are compromise because no car is perfect. So, this is one compromise I may have to accept. But, I certainly don't blame any poster (like the original poster) who feels uncomfortable about the poor fuel economy of many Infiniti vehicles.

EX35
11-16-2007, 11:10 AM
That's just it...I don't think it is poor fuel economy at all.

Darth62
11-16-2007, 11:55 AM
That's just it...I don't think it is poor fuel economy at all.

The EX35 is smaller inside than either the RDX, or X3 and about 300 pounds lighter. Yet, the AWD EX is likely to get poorer gas mileage than either (assuming that the EX35 gets slightly worse MPG than the Infiniti G35X).


Ditto for vehicles like the G35, and M35. Both get worse mileage than their natural competition from Acura, BMW, and Lexus.

The VQ35 is a world class engine with oddles of low RPM torque, smooth performance, and proven reliablity. But, it is not especially efficient, especially in the Infiniti version.

Again, MPG will not stop me from buying, but it is a downside to this vehicle.

EX35
11-16-2007, 05:00 PM
The EX35 is smaller inside than either the RDX, or X3 and about 300 pounds lighter. Yet, the AWD EX is likely to get poorer gas mileage than either (assuming that the EX35 gets slightly worse MPG than the Infiniti G35X).


Ditto for vehicles like the G35, and M35. Both get worse mileage than their natural competition from Acura, BMW, and Lexus.

The VQ35 is a world class engine with oddles of low RPM torque, smooth performance, and proven reliablity. But, it is not especially efficient, especially in the Infiniti version.

Again, MPG will not stop me from buying, but it is a downside to this vehicle.

I have an '03 FX35 AWD and I consistently get 23 mpg highway...most of my driving is highway. I have over 75k miles on it and the performance has been flawless.

Darth62
11-16-2007, 05:47 PM
I have an '03 FX35 AWD and I consistently get 23 mpg highway...most of my driving is highway. I have over 75k miles on it and the performance has been flawless.

FX35 AWD - 15/20
X3 - 17/24
RDX - 17/22
RAV V6 - 19/26


I think it is pretty clear that the FX35 is significantly less efficient than it's rivals. And, yeah, it is bigger on the outside. But, all of these vehicles have as much internal room.

In a RAV V6, which would be about as fast, you'd get 6 miles more per gallon on the highway.

The MDX, which has a lot more space inside and a more sophisticated AWD system, has the exact same MPG as the FX35.

EX35
11-17-2007, 02:14 PM
FX35 AWD - 15/20
X3 - 17/24
RDX - 17/22
RAV V6 - 19/26


I think it is pretty clear that the FX35 is significantly less efficient than it's rivals. And, yeah, it is bigger on the outside. But, all of these vehicles have as much internal room.

In a RAV V6, which would be about as fast, you'd get 6 miles more per gallon on the highway.

The MDX, which has a lot more space inside and a more sophisticated AWD system, has the exact same MPG as the FX35.

What happened to the EX35 gas mileage...that's not the rating the '03 has on my sticker...its 16/23.

There are plenty of options out there today, so people should pick what best suits their needs. Perhaps you should direct your communications directly to Nissan/Infiniti as none of us in the forum can address your issues with gas mileage.

I would still pick an Infiniti over anything you mentioned because of the superior driving experience.

EX35
11-17-2007, 02:19 PM
FX35 AWD - 15/20
X3 - 17/24
RDX - 17/22
RAV V6 - 19/26


I think it is pretty clear that the FX35 is significantly less efficient than it's rivals. And, yeah, it is bigger on the outside. But, all of these vehicles have as much internal room.

In a RAV V6, which would be about as fast, you'd get 6 miles more per gallon on the highway.

The MDX, which has a lot more space inside and a more sophisticated AWD system, has the exact same MPG as the FX35.

Oh...I see...this is the new rating system. With that in mind, then the 18/24 on the EX35 should be even better...AND...to be rated at 297 hp...that's EXCELLENT!

You really do step down a level on the RAV 4 too because it is hardly 'luxurious'...but, you save about $20,000 too. Perhaps that vehicle might be better for you then.

ZYAL8R808
11-17-2007, 05:45 PM
Bottom line to answer the original question is that the 2008 EX35 will have better gas mileage when compared to a FX35. It's safe to say you should see 2-4 MPG difference in the real world.

Darth62
11-17-2007, 10:06 PM
Oh...I see...this is the new rating system. With that in mind, then the 18/24 on the EX35 should be even better...AND...to be rated at 297 hp...that's EXCELLENT!

You really do step down a level on the RAV 4 too because it is hardly 'luxurious'...but, you save about $20,000 too. Perhaps that vehicle might be better for you then.

I think you are still missing the point. Potential buyers like me can be impressed by fuel economy on the RAV4 and other vehicles be concerned about the MPG on the EX, but still opt for the Infinti anyway. All cars have plus and minuses and poor fuel economy is simply the minus in the Infiniti line.

And, btw, the EX35 is not going to get 18/24. I'm not sure where you got those numbers from either. The EPA for the AWD version is 16/23 - equivalent to the older rating for your FX35.

The EPA for the RWD version is 17/24. So, while fuel economy is not terrible for this class, it is also not impressive. Basically, the RWD EX35 gets about the same MPG as a larger AWD RDX.

EX35
11-18-2007, 03:56 PM
17/24...18/24...shoot me, I was off by 1 mile.

A RAV4 and an EX so far apart from one another in terms of type of vehicle, I wouldn't even bother to compare them...might as well complain that the EX doesn't get the same mileage as a Prius.

I also note that you fail to mention the HP differences in these cars...for some tha tis worth th trade-off. The mileage differences are hardly lightyears away.

You totally left out the Hybrid Lexus RX...it puts them all to shame in terms of hp and mileage...and you can get one for the price of an EX.

FYI...just came from the car show and saw the EX in person. TOTALLY cool. TOTALLY...I looked at a $44k BMW X3 there too...seem totally cheap in comparison. The RDX was totally cheap too. The MDX...well, that thing is just u-g-l-y. The RAV-4 was like a toy...doors sounded hollow...no t-h-u-n--k.

Darth62
11-18-2007, 11:26 PM
17/24...18/24...shoot me, I was off by 1 mile.

A RAV4 and an EX so far apart from one another in terms of type of vehicle, I wouldn't even bother to compare them...might as well complain that the EX doesn't get the same mileage as a Prius.

I also note that you fail to mention the HP differences in these cars...for some tha tis worth th trade-off. The mileage differences are hardly lightyears away.

You totally left out the Hybrid Lexus RX...it puts them all to shame in terms of hp and mileage...and you can get one for the price of an EX.

FYI...just came from the car show and saw the EX in person. TOTALLY cool. TOTALLY...I looked at a $44k BMW X3 there too...seem totally cheap in comparison. The RDX was totally cheap too. The MDX...well, that thing is just u-g-l-y. The RAV-4 was like a toy...doors sounded hollow...no t-h-u-n--k.

A fair comparison should be an AWD vs AWD models. The EX35 AWD gets 16/23. All of the numbers I posted above were for AWD vehicles, and the EX35 despite being smaller gets worse gas mileage.

I suppose you could argue that an advantage of the EX35 is that it offers an RWD model t hough.

That said, I'm on my way to the car show tomorrow night to look at it. If I'm not impressed, I will probably "settle" for a G or an M. So, that should tell you that I agree with you on about the quality and performance of Infiniti products.

MandiB
11-20-2007, 04:56 PM
wow. big debate here. after lots of thought I'll probably end up with the EX. I need the ooomph to get around the hilly terrain here (which is why I have an X5, nearly got run over one night going up a big hill in a CRV). I am considering asking about the rwd, as that may be just a tad bit better for mileage. I've looked at the Lexus suv and it's just not as nice inside. I love the gadgets on the infiniti.
I do wish luxury car companies cared more about improving the mileage. I care, and I'm sure others do too.

The Weatherman
11-20-2007, 05:17 PM
wow. big debate here. after lots of thought I'll probably end up with the EX. I need the ooomph to get around the hilly terrain here (which is why I have an X5, nearly got run over one night going up a big hill in a CRV). I am considering asking about the rwd, as that may be just a tad bit better for mileage. I've looked at the Lexus suv and it's just not as nice inside. I love the gadgets on the infiniti.
I do wish luxury car companies cared more about improving the mileage. I care, and I'm sure others do too.

Okay, everyone complains that they want more, more, and more power. Not only that... people want them safer, and safer yet. Oh, then you want a quality interior. What, you can make the car as powerful as you can get with the added weight of all of the safety and luxury features? You can't beat the laws of physics with a combustion engine. Do you need the oomph to get around the hills? Then there are many other choices of cars that give you the better gas miliage. If you want luxury and gas, get yourself a diesel or the couple mpg's better of a hybrid. It's the consumer that demands these cars. It's like telling a weatherman that you want snow falling to play in, but it has to be 70 degrees so you can be comfortable. I think twenty-something mpg's on the highway with the new measurement guidelines from the EPA is pretty darn good for a 4,100 pound AWD vehicle, with 297 hp.

EX35
11-20-2007, 06:52 PM
A fair comparison should be an AWD vs AWD models. The EX35 AWD gets 16/23. All of the numbers I posted above were for AWD vehicles, and the EX35 despite being smaller gets worse gas mileage.

I suppose you could argue that an advantage of the EX35 is that it offers an RWD model t hough.

That said, I'm on my way to the car show tomorrow night to look at it. If I'm not impressed, I will probably "settle" for a G or an M. So, that should tell you that I agree with you on about the quality and performance of Infiniti products.

An AWD V-6 RAV4 gets 19/26. I think the difference between that and the 16/23 of the AWD EX is negligible when you get the extra power and luxury of the EX. That's only 3 more mpgs. I think when someone is really concerned about gas mileage, they are looking for improvements of another 10 or more mpgs. For those people, I say get a hybrid. Bothe the hybrid Toyota Highlander and Lexus RX will still have the 'oomph' and beat the RAV 4 in gas mileage, plus deliver a much more comfortable package than the RAV 4.

Darth62
11-20-2007, 07:12 PM
An AWD V-6 RAV4 gets 19/26. I think the difference between that and the 16/23 of the AWD EX is negligible when you get the extra power and luxury of the EX. That's only 3 more mpgs. I think when someone is really concerned about gas mileage, they are looking for improvements of another 10 or more mpgs. For those people, I say get a hybrid. Bothe the hybrid Toyota Highlander and Lexus RX will still have the 'oomph' and beat the RAV 4 in gas mileage, plus deliver a much more comfortable package than the RAV 4.

The average American drives 15,000 miles a year. At 23 MPG, that is 652 gallons of gas per year. At 26, it is 576. So, you're talking about a difference of about 78 gallons a gas per year. From an environmental standpoint, I don't see that as trivial. From a money standpoint, I paid $3.50 for premium last night. If you add in the difference from premium vs. regular (which the Rav4 takes), you're talking about an extra car payment each year.

of course, all this is said by a man who has decided to buy a very inefficient vehicle (M35). So, although I am willing to sacrifice fuel economy for comfort and peformance, others might not want to (out of a sense of responsibility to the environment, or because they don't feel good about having to give more money to the Hugo Chavez' of the world).

Incidently, at the LA Auto show last night, the Infiniti people told me that the 16/23 was a "projection based on our track record with the G35." I don't think the final EPA numbers are actually in yet.

EX35
11-20-2007, 08:13 PM
The average American drives 15,000 miles a year. At 23 MPG, that is 652 gallons of gas per year. At 26, it is 576. So, you're talking about a difference of about 78 gallons a gas per year. From an environmental standpoint, I don't see that as trivial. From a money standpoint, I paid $3.50 for premium last night. If you add in the difference from premium vs. regular (which the Rav4 takes), you're talking about an extra car payment each year.

of course, all this is said by a man who has decided to buy a very inefficient vehicle (M35). So, although I am willing to sacrifice fuel economy for comfort and peformance, others might not want to (out of a sense of responsibility to the environment, or because they don't feel good about having to give more money to the Hugo Chavez' of the world).

Incidently, at the LA Auto show last night, the Infiniti people told me that the 16/23 was a "projection based on our track record with the G35." I don't think the final EPA numbers are actually in yet.



Why compare the EX to a RAV4 for if you REALLY want to be "responsible citizen of the world'? It's STILL negligible in that comparison. Why even bother...just get a hydrid and be all you can be. THat should be worth at least 3 car payments per year...or better yet, get on your bike...and/or ride mass transportation and save 12 car payments a year and whatever number of barrels of oil the EX/M35 might expend.

Hugo just called...he said thanks in advance for buying the M35! :D

07G35S
11-20-2007, 08:51 PM
I'm surprised no one has suggested the RX400h, my mom drives one, she consistently gets good gas mileage, and it has similar power to the EX. This choice leaves you feeling great about "saving the world" you keep a powerful engine, and you have the power to get you up the side of the mountain or whatever. Of course you're paying a premium for the hybrid, but its not crazy money compared to an X5.

Fuel Tank Capacity: 17.2 gal.
EPA Mileage Estimates: (City/Highway) Automatic: : 27 mpg / 24 mpg Range in Miles: (City/Highway)
Automatic: 464.4 mi. / 412.8 mi.

Darth62
11-20-2007, 08:51 PM
Why compare the EX to a RAV4 for if you REALLY want to be "responsible citizen of the world'? It's STILL negligible in that comparison. Why even bother...just get a hydrid and be all you can be. THat should be worth at least 3 car payments per year...or better yet, get on your bike...and/or ride mass transportation and save 12 car payments a year and whatever number of barrels of oil the EX/M35 might expend.

Hugo just called...he said thanks in advance for buying the M35! :D

Its all about balance. 19/26 mpg on regular gas is something that most of us could live with. It gets hard to swallow the MPG that I'll get out of my likely next purchase.

Darth62
11-20-2007, 08:55 PM
I'm surprised no one has suggested the RX400h, my mom drives one, she consistently gets good gas mileage, and it has similar power to the EX. This choice leaves you feeling great about "saving the world" you keep a powerful engine, and you have the power to get you up the side of the mountain or whatever. Of course you're paying a premium for the hybrid, but its not crazy money compared to an X5.

I think EX35 is making that very point. If you are interested in fuel economy, go with an hybrid.

EX35
11-21-2007, 08:15 AM
I'm surprised no one has suggested the RX400h, my mom drives one, she consistently gets good gas mileage, and it has similar power to the EX. This choice leaves you feeling great about "saving the world" you keep a powerful engine, and you have the power to get you up the side of the mountain or whatever. Of course you're paying a premium for the hybrid, but its not crazy money compared to an X5.

Fuel Tank Capacity: 17.2 gal.
EPA Mileage Estimates: (City/Highway) Automatic: : 27 mpg / 24 mpg Range in Miles: (City/Highway)
Automatic: 464.4 mi. / 412.8 mi.

I suggested it twice...the few posters who responded are turning their noses up at hybrids. They try to make it sound like they are being environmentally responsible for suggesting a RAV4 over an EX. I think if you REALLY are concerned about gas mileage, theyre are better alternatives to a RAV4.

The Weatherman
11-21-2007, 10:59 AM
A couple things I noticed about the new motor... Does anyone notice that when you start up a new G that they rev really high when you start when cold? My FX doesn't rev that high at all. Another thing about the mileage, I don't know if I'm crazy, but the new G, with the torque converter locked, revs higher on the highway than my FX. Do you think the highway RPMs have something to do with not much of an increase in highway fuel mileage?

Darth62
11-21-2007, 11:45 AM
I suggested it twice...the few posters who responded are turning their noses up at hybrids. They try to make it sound like they are being environmentally responsible for suggesting a RAV4 over an EX. I think if you REALLY are concerned about gas mileage, theyre are better alternatives to a RAV4.

Nobody who is interested in any of the vehicles in this class (EX35, Murano, X3, etc) is going to consider a road boat like the Lexus RX. The thing drives like a great big Buick.

This is where I've always disagreed with your posts. You are all black or white. If you care about MPG you MUST drive either a hybrid or a nonpremium 4-cyl. There is an inbetween, vehicles that offer decent performance, acceptable gas mileage and decent comfort. Toyota could make that car right now by simply offering a Lexus version of the RAV4. Honda could have done that as well, by inserting their VCM V6 into the RDX.

Its not all or nothing. You can want to be responsible and not get taken to the bank at the pump without wanting to make the leap to a hybrid or 4-cyl car. Just because somebody is concerned about the crappy fuel economy of the Inifniti line (which, if you look at the model comparisons in Consumer Reports, is considerably worse on a model by model basis than BMW, Mercedes, Audi, etc) doesn't mean fuel economy is their only concern or even their chief concern.

Go visit the M35 board. One post after another complaining about lousy MPG and stating that as a reason they'd opt to go elsewhere next time. Those do not seem to be drivers that REALLY (as you put it) care about MPG and should be in a hybrid. They're just sportluxo sedan drivers who want respectable milage from their vehicle - which apparently they are not getting. Those guys are not expecting hybrid MPG - they just want to be getting more than 16 mpg in the city. According to CR, competing models in that class get anywhere from 20 - 29 MPG, while the Inifniti M35 gets 19 overall.

Oil hit $100 a barrel this weekend. Paying attention to fuel economy just makes good sense, regardless of how much you can afford to spend on a car or how nice an SUV you drive. That doesn't mean that REALLY care about MPG more than anything else - just that it is a resonable concern.

EX35
11-21-2007, 12:43 PM
Nobody who is interested in any of the vehicles in this class (EX35, Murano, X3, etc) is going to consider a road boat like the Lexus RX. The thing drives like a great big Buick.

This is where I've always disagreed with your posts. You are all black or white. If you care about MPG you MUST drive either a hybrid or a nonpremium 4-cyl. There is an inbetween, vehicles that offer decent performance, acceptable gas mileage and decent comfort. Toyota could make that car right now by simply offering a Lexus version of the RAV4. Honda could have done that as well, by inserting their VCM V6 into the RDX.

Its not all or nothing. You can want to be responsible and not get taken to the bank at the pump without wanting to make the leap to a hybrid or 4-cyl car. Just because somebody is concerned about the crappy fuel economy of the Inifniti line (which, if you look at the model comparisons in Consumer Reports, is considerably worse on a model by model basis than BMW, Mercedes, Audi, etc) doesn't mean fuel economy is their only concern or even their chief concern.

Go visit the M35 board. One post after another complaining about lousy MPG and stating that as a reason they'd opt to go elsewhere next time. Those do not seem to be drivers that REALLY (as you put it) care about MPG and should be in a hybrid. They're just sportluxo sedan drivers who want respectable milage from their vehicle - which apparently they are not getting. Those guys are not expecting hybrid MPG - they just want to be getting more than 16 mpg in the city. According to CR, competing models in that class get anywhere from 20 - 29 MPG, while the Inifniti M35 gets 19 overall.

Oil hit $100 a barrel this weekend. Paying attention to fuel economy just makes good sense, regardless of how much you can afford to spend on a car or how nice an SUV you drive. That doesn't mean that REALLY care about MPG more than anything else - just that it is a resonable concern.

The RX is HARDLY a 'road boat'...have you driven the Hybrid? Do you know how much combined hp that vehicle has? I have driven an RX on several occasiions when I take my Lexus GS in for service.

R u saying people didn't know about the gas mileage BEFORE they bought their Ms?

Please calm down...

wysguymd
11-21-2007, 02:20 PM
Nobody who is interested in any of the vehicles in this class (EX35, Murano, X3, etc) is going to consider a road boat like the Lexus RX. The thing drives like a great big Buick.

My other car is a Lexus RX. It's not a "road boat". Granted it's long overdue for a redesign, but it has an amazingly smooth ride, handles really well and is easy to drive. (I have less trouble parking the RX in tight spaces than my TSX.) It also gets great gas milage (non-hybrid) - 23 city/30 hwy. I do put it in the same category as the EX, MDX, X5, etc. The Murano would be more comparable to a Toyota model, not Lexus.

I don't think one necessarily needs to buy a hybrid to get good gas mileage. There are limited hybrid options in the luxury car segment, and from my understanding, the price premium isn't worth the extra expense. But it's irresponsible the car companies are selling $40k+ vehicles that get less than 20mpg.

Darth62
11-21-2007, 02:46 PM
The RX is HARDLY a 'road boat'...have you driven the Hybrid? Do you know how much combined hp that vehicle has? I have driven an RX on several occasiions when I take my Lexus GS in for service.

R u saying people didn't know about the gas mileage BEFORE they bought their Ms?

Please calm down...

First all, the "calm down" remark isn't necessary. There is no need to get personal or to comment on anybody's emotional state. . Besides, there wasn't so much as a hint of anger or flame in that post anyway.

Second, my comments about the RX refer to handling and size. The amount of horse power it has is an entirely different issue. I compared the Lexus to a Buick for a reason - some Buicks do have big engines and decent 0 - 60 times. What none of them have, however, is a reasonable handling/ride compromise. I think that drivers who are looking at the FX, RDX, EX35, X3, are probably wanting something that handles well and is a bit sporty.

As for the M drivers, why don't you go ask them why they are disappointed by the fuel economy of their vehicles? There is thread after thread about that issue on the M35 forum.

The bottom line is that no vehicle is perfect. Most of consider styling, performance, size/space, fuel economy, reliability, safety, and price and give our own weighting to each factor. Ultimately, the car you buy will compromise on some factors. I simply don't agree that you either give fuel economy no weight in the equation or take it above all other factors.

Obviously, I'm seriously considering the M35, and I've looked at the Infiniti line of SUVs, so fuel economy is not the most important factor for me. But, it is a factor - as it is for most buyers. Given that you drive an FX, I suspect fuel economy has a low weight for you - and that is your choice which I respect. But, then don't go saying that it should be unimportant to anybody else unless you want to buy a hybrid or small 4-cyl.

I've seen similar arguments raised on M-B and BMW forums about reliablity. Last week, somebody suggested I consider M-B E-series. Well, we've had several M-Bs over the years. The reliablity problems and cost to upkeep were ridiculous. When I raised this point, his response "If you care so much about reliablity and expense to own, you shouldn't be looking in this class, you should be looking at a Toyota Camry or Honda Accord." I thought that dismissive attitude was silly, just like I think your comments about MPG are a bit off base (not trying to flame you).

There is nothing wrong with wanting a vehicle that is a good balance of everything, as long as your recognize that the perfect car is not there and that there will have to be some tradeoffs.

Darth62
11-21-2007, 02:51 PM
My other car is a Lexus RX. It's not a "road boat". Granted it's long overdue for a redesign, but it has an amazingly smooth ride, handles really well and is easy to drive. (I have less trouble parking the RX in tight spaces than my TSX.) It also gets great gas milage (non-hybrid) - 23 city/30 hwy. I do put it in the same category as the EX, MDX, X5, etc. The Murano would be more comparable to a Toyota model, not Lexus.

I don't think one necessarily needs to buy a hybrid to get good gas mileage. There are limited hybrid options in the luxury car segment, and from my understanding, the price premium isn't worth the extra expense. But it's irresponsible the car companies are selling $40k+ vehicles that get less than 20mpg.

I apologize. I did not mean to disrespect your ride. I admit that the "road boat" remark was over the top. However, I test drove the RX several times and my camping buddy has one now. I'll still stand by my observation that it handles like Buick Sedan or even a Toyota Avalon. I agree with you that it is smooth as silk as far as ride is concerned, but I'll strong disagree that it "handles well." To me, it handles like a minivan, with lots of top heavy body roll. All the car mags, Edmunds, Consumer Reports, etc would basically support that conclusion.

The AWD Lexus RX350 has an EPA of 17/22. So, you'll forgive me if I express a little bit of skepticism about the 23/30 for the non-hybrid. Even my 4-cyl TSX doesn't get that. On the other hand, I have to agree with you that the fuel economy of the Lexus vehicles with the 3.5 V6 is impressive.

BTW, I have a feeling that this year's RX will be an easier vehicle to live with than whatever comes after the redesign. Inevitably, the redesign will get longer and wider. The RX350 as it is now, is a fairly reasonable size. The new Toyota Highland is only a bit bigger, but it just feels like a much larger vehicle to me.

I 100% buy you last point. That sums it up for me totally.

07G35S
11-21-2007, 05:25 PM
Well I don't see where the irresponsible piece comes in. If you think its irresponsible, then you don't have to buy it. I don't necessarily think its responsible for companies to sell cigarettes or handguns, but if people continue to buy them, I can't blame them for selling them. If no one bought a 40k SUV that got 16/21 like my wife's Jeep GC, then they'd probably try something else.

Like you said, you prioritize YOUR needs and buy the car YOU want, its not important what anyone else thinks. Sure there isn't a perfect car, but there are cars with different attributes in each segment giving people options!

Darth62
11-21-2007, 05:41 PM
Well I don't see where the irresponsible piece comes in. If you think its irresponsible, then you don't have to buy it. I don't necessarily think its responsible for companies to sell cigarettes or handguns, but if people continue to buy them, I can't blame them for selling them. If no one bought a 40k SUV that got 16/21 like my wife's Jeep GC, then they'd probably try something else.

Like you said, you prioritize YOUR needs and buy the car YOU want, its not important what anyone else thinks. Sure there isn't a perfect car, but there are cars with different attributes in each segment giving people options!

I think it might be considered "irreponsible" when car makers focus on marketing at the expense of fuel economy. I often think that engines are tuned to emphasize numbers like HP (which doens't always translate to real world economy) just so a car can be advertised with numbers that are better than the competition.

07G35S
11-21-2007, 06:04 PM
HP is great though, maybe not for those in an SUV, but at the same time, I'm definitely enjoying my wife's 300hp GC (hemi) over her old ~200 hp GC (V6). PLUS... they both get exactly the same gas mileage ~18mpg

4U4ME
11-21-2007, 06:20 PM
more MPG is always good soon its going to be $4.00/G

EX35
11-21-2007, 08:05 PM
First all, the "calm down" remark isn't necessary. There is no need to get personal or to comment on anybody's emotional state. . Besides, there wasn't so much as a hint of anger or flame in that post anyway.

Second, my comments about the RX refer to handling and size. The amount of horse power it has is an entirely different issue. I compared the Lexus to a Buick for a reason - some Buicks do have big engines and decent 0 - 60 times. What none of them have, however, is a reasonable handling/ride compromise. I think that drivers who are looking at the FX, RDX, EX35, X3, are probably wanting something that handles well and is a bit sporty.

As for the M drivers, why don't you go ask them why they are disappointed by the fuel economy of their vehicles? There is thread after thread about that issue on the M35 forum.

The bottom line is that no vehicle is perfect. Most of consider styling, performance, size/space, fuel economy, reliability, safety, and price and give our own weighting to each factor. Ultimately, the car you buy will compromise on some factors. I simply don't agree that you either give fuel economy no weight in the equation or take it above all other factors.

Obviously, I'm seriously considering the M35, and I've looked at the Infiniti line of SUVs, so fuel economy is not the most important factor for me. But, it is a factor - as it is for most buyers. Given that you drive an FX, I suspect fuel economy has a low weight for you - and that is your choice which I respect. But, then don't go saying that it should be unimportant to anybody else unless you want to buy a hybrid or small 4-cyl.

I've seen similar arguments raised on M-B and BMW forums about reliablity. Last week, somebody suggested I consider M-B E-series. Well, we've had several M-Bs over the years. The reliablity problems and cost to upkeep were ridiculous. When I raised this point, his response "If you care so much about reliablity and expense to own, you shouldn't be looking in this class, you should be looking at a Toyota Camry or Honda Accord." I thought that dismissive attitude was silly, just like I think your comments about MPG are a bit off base (not trying to flame you).

There is nothing wrong with wanting a vehicle that is a good balance of everything, as long as your recognize that the perfect car is not there and that there will have to be some tradeoffs.

Good God...wHaTeVeR...

wysguymd
11-21-2007, 09:05 PM
The AWD Lexus RX350 has an EPA of 17/22. So, you'll forgive me if I express a little bit of skepticism about the 23/30 for the non-hybrid. Even my 4-cyl TSX doesn't get that. On the other hand, I have to agree with you that the fuel economy of the Lexus vehicles with the 3.5 V6 is impressive.

No joke. I live in the Washington DC area and travel to Myrtle Beach SC three times a year. The trip computer on the RX always shows at least 30mpg on those trips - one time 32! Mixed driving in the suburbs gets at least 23 mpg.

Was torn between the RX and the FX at the time. Ultimately decided on the RX because of the interior layout and better visibility.

Darth62
11-22-2007, 02:03 AM
Good God...wHaTeVeR...

Great contribution to the thread.

Why did you even bother posting this?

Darth62
11-22-2007, 02:07 AM
No joke. I live in the Washington DC area and travel to Myrtle Beach SC three times a year. The trip computer on the RX always shows at least 30mpg on those trips - one time 32! Mixed driving in the suburbs gets at least 23 mpg.

Was torn between the RX and the FX at the time. Ultimately decided on the RX because of the interior layout and better visibility.

I'd be surprised if that trip computer was correct. Neither the EPA or Consumer Reports got numbers anywhere near that. However, given the size of the vehicle, I consider the numbers it does get to be impressive. CR found that the AWD RX350 got 19 mpg, including a mix of city and highway driving. That is on par with what much smaller (and no faster) SUVs get. If I liked the handling better, the RX would be the vehicle of choice.

Incidently, Lexus is planning two SUVs in that general size. A replacement for the RX, which will offer the same smoothness and serene driving environment, and a sport model derived from the IS350 platform.

EX35
11-22-2007, 08:25 AM
Great contribution to the thread.

Why did you even bother posting this?

I had the same thought and question about your thread. Finally...we agree.

Darth62
11-22-2007, 11:55 AM
I had the same thought and question about your thread. Finally...we agree.

I really don't know why you can't have a friendly exchange of ideas about an issue without resorting to snitty remarks, personal insults, etc. But, I'm not going to play flame war with you.

If you want to chat about the EX35, Infiniti vehicles, MPG as it relates to Nissan products, great. I'm happy to read what you say, and will try to respond the best I can. Otherwise, I have little interest in trading taunts and I'm sure the moderators will wind up removing you from the board rather quickly.

In the meantime, happy thanksgiving to you and everybody else reading this thread.

Darth62
11-22-2007, 11:59 AM
HP is great though, maybe not for those in an SUV, but at the same time, I'm definitely enjoying my wife's 300hp GC (hemi) over her old ~200 hp GC (V6). PLUS... they both get exactly the same gas mileage ~18mpg

I have to admit that I am coming at this from the perspective of my current vehicle, an Acura TSX. It has 40 more HP than the USDM Accord, but I've always felt that was sort of an illusion. The extra power is mostly available at RPM that normal drivers don't go.

Your wife's vehicle is a different issue. That extra HP also comes along with lots of low RPM torque. So, the bigger engine, and decreased MPG, is a reasonable tradeoff in that case.

EX35
11-22-2007, 07:45 PM
I really don't know why you can't have a friendly exchange of ideas about an issue without resorting to snitty remarks, personal insults, etc. But, I'm not going to play flame war with you.

If you want to chat about the EX35, Infiniti vehicles, MPG as it relates to Nissan products, great. I'm happy to read what you say, and will try to respond the best I can. Otherwise, I have little interest in trading taunts and I'm sure the moderators will wind up removing you from the board rather quickly.

In the meantime, happy thanksgiving to you and everybody else reading this thread.

I think you are the one who got 'snitty' when everyone didn't agree with some of your comments. You even insulted vehicles here that others on this thread actually own when some of us questioned your 'logic'.

In any case, get over yourself, and enjoy the rest of your Thanksgiving too...and enjoy your M!

Oh...and I have been a member of this site since '02. I have seen some pretty nasty stuff here from members who are still here. Some of those posts make this whole thread look like a whine-fest. ;)

07G35S
11-22-2007, 09:59 PM
I have to admit that I am coming at this from the perspective of my current vehicle, an Acura TSX. It has 40 more HP than the USDM Accord, but I've always felt that was sort of an illusion. The extra power is mostly available at RPM that normal drivers don't go.

Your wife's vehicle is a different issue. That extra HP also comes along with lots of low RPM torque. So, the bigger engine, and decreased MPG, is a reasonable tradeoff in that case.

My point was that I didn't have to tradeoff MPG as the 200hp v6 gets the same gas mileage the 300hp V8 gets. I speculate this is because the larger engine doesnt have to try as hard to pull the heavy vehicle. The old V6 always seemed to be straining. The V8 never needs high RPMs to accelerate at a moderate pace.

As for the RX threads... its possible that the people posting these 30+ mpg HWY mileage are driving the 1st gen RX 300's (nonAWD) which probably could get 30+ mpg. Just an idea.

Darth62
11-24-2007, 06:18 PM
My point was that I didn't have to tradeoff MPG as the 200hp v6 gets the same gas mileage the 300hp V8 gets. I speculate this is because the larger engine doesnt have to try as hard to pull the heavy vehicle. The old V6 always seemed to be straining. The V8 never needs high RPMs to accelerate at a moderate pace.

As for the RX threads... its possible that the people posting these 30+ mpg HWY mileage are driving the 1st gen RX 300's (nonAWD) which probably could get 30+ mpg. Just an idea.

Sorry to misunderstand!

I guess more hp, whether it is associated with a loss of MPG or not is always a good thing, as long as it is real HP. I don't think the horsepower in my own vehicle is "real" HP because it is up at RPMs I don't normally go to. So, at least for vehicles like the Acura TSX, I see the increased compression ratio (and resulting loss of MPG and need for premium) as a advertising gimic. I honestly don't believe that my car performs any better than garden variety USDM Accord. But, the Accord gets better MPG and uses regular fuel.

In your case, it sounds like it worked out all around. Better torque, useable HP, and no loss in fuel economy. Hard to complain about that!

The real question, at least for this forum, is whether a similar pattern holds for the Infiniti line. That is, do gains in HP over the years really impact the driving experience? And, is the MPG/performance tradeoff a positive one - like it is with you wife's vehicle? If that is the case, then it would be hard to have any complaints about Infiniti/Nissan either.

As for the RX, that driver above (and no shot at him - he obviously knows his stuff) was reporting 23/30. I simply don't see any RX putting up those kind of numbers. That is way behind the EPA for the 2WD, and even beyond anything that Consumer Reports has gotten for any Lexus SUV over the years. My 4-cyl TSX doesn't even do that. I think the more likely scenario is that the source, which he says is his vehicle's trip computer, is not accurate.

Darth62
11-24-2007, 06:26 PM
I. Some of those posts make this whole thread look like a whine-fest. ;)
As I've tried to make clear, I really have no interest in playing flame war with you regardless of how you've interacted with other posters at this board. The childish personal insults and the sarcastic remarks are not appropriate and have no place on this board. So, I've added you to my ignore list, and will no longer be reading to or responding to your posts. I suggest you do the same for me.

Still, I wanted wish you luck with your vehicle purchase and hope that it works out well for you, whether it is a new EX35 or something else.

wysguymd
11-24-2007, 08:59 PM
As for the RX, that driver above (and no shot at him - he obviously knows his stuff) was reporting 23/30. I simply don't see any RX putting up those kind of numbers. That is way behind the EPA for the 2WD, and even beyond anything that Consumer Reports has gotten for any Lexus SUV over the years. My 4-cyl TSX doesn't even do that. I think the more likely scenario is that the source, which he says is his vehicle's trip computer, is not accurate.

LOL, I don't want to dwell on this as it's not relevant to the board. But, I do get 30mpg in a 2007 RX350 AWD on highway trips. The trip computer isn't wrong, I've calculated it manually too. This is a total highway trip running a constant 60-65mph for 300+ miles. Go look at other Lexus RX specific boards and there are other drivers who get similar mileage. The mpg drops off considerably to the low 20s around town, but i've hit the 30mpg average on several 400+ mile trips.

My TSX does 35mpg on the same trip.

Driving style has alot to do with mileage, don't forget. ;o)

Darth62
11-24-2007, 09:55 PM
LOL, I don't want to dwell on this as it's not relevant to the board. But, I do get 30mpg in a 2007 RX350 AWD on highway trips. The trip computer isn't wrong, I've calculated it manually too. This is a total highway trip running a constant 60-65mph for 300+ miles. Go look at other Lexus RX specific boards and there are other drivers who get similar mileage. The mpg drops off considerably to the low 20s around town, but i've hit the 30mpg average on several 400+ mile trips.

My TSX does 35mpg on the same trip.

Driving style has alot to do with mileage, don't forget. ;o)

Well, driving style does have a lot to do with mileage and I can't say what going on with your particular vehicle. But, CR, Consumerguide, the EPA, and every other source that has tested the RX hasn't gotten anywhere near those numbers. So, you own fuel economy not withstanding, I don't believe the typical driver is going to get MPG like that in the RX, EX35, or any other six cyl SUV on the market (excluding hybrids and diesels).

rennie4
11-24-2007, 10:38 PM
I have a 2006 altima 4cyl that is rated at 23/29. I got 39.5 mpg going a steady 65 on the NYS thruway going to albany before. It all depends on how u drive. This is by the trip computer by the way and i believe it is accurate. One tank of mixed driving yeilded 29.8 and i calculated it by hand just to see how accurate the trip computer was. Astonishingly, I got 29.8 with the manual calculation also.

Darth62
11-25-2007, 02:35 PM
I'm not going to dispute your numbers because I have no reason to doubt your word.

Maybe the bottom line to all these discussions is that you have to use EPA numbers and the like for comparison purposes. It may be the case that some drivers are getting great mileage witht the RX, Altima, etc. But, on average, those vehicles won't do as well with higher EPA numbers.

kotoma
11-27-2007, 10:14 AM
From EX, FX, RX down to altima. How about civic EX 43/50 :)

higbyz
11-27-2007, 08:00 PM
Right now I own a 2007 VW Passat wagon v6 awd...it gets 28mpg hwy and if you choose to keep it under 70mph you can get 30mpg. This car has 280 hp...I am considering the new EX but gas mileage may turn me off especially if premium is close to $4 a gallon ...which seems to be a reasonable possibility...I dont understand why nissan cant get better mpg out of this engine....plus the small backseat is another negative...my wife has an 07 V6 rav 4...it hauls butt ...its the limited with leather interior and its just pretty average inside....gas mileage is not as good as my Passat but it still will get 28 on the hwy....You really cant compare this to cars that cost 5 to 10 grand more its not fair....I like the Rav but the vw is a much nicer ride and I assume the Ex will be every bit as nice as the Passat