I made a 220 mile round trip yesterday and my Malibu crossed the 1700 mile mark. There was perhaps 10 miles of city driving, 130 miles of non-stop highway driving and 80 miles of two lane, mostly non-stop driving. I reset the Avg MPG display at the start of the trip.

Using the crusie control, I maintained a maximum speed of 60 mph. I tried to keep the LTZ in as high a gear as possible. I was extremely pleased with the fuel mileage.

At the end of the trip as I pulled into my driveway the DIC reported 30.8 mpg. The highest I noticed during the trip was 30.9 mpg. I truly believe I would have broke into the 31 mpg range if the trip was longer, as the DIC was climbing while still on the highways.

Anyone else care to report their V6, 6 speed MPG performance?

I average only 25mpg. But I run much faster than your 60mph. With ~6,000 miles on the clock, 80% highway miles, my average speed is 56mph on the DIC. I can see that 30+mpg is achievable if I lightened up my foot a bit.

When I drive my wife's car, I also average 25mpg while she can get 30+.

The new 4-cyl, 6-speed set up will probably do much better.

Pizza Man...

These are promsing numbers as I have also order the V6....Good to see the great fuel economy.

Cheers

That's pretty impressive. How is the fuel economy during suburban and/or city driving alone?

My first vehicle was a 5.7L V8 Silverado and I currently drive an older Buick V6, and while my gut says I should go with the 4cyl based on MPG alone, I'm wondering if I'm going to regret it. I'm just not sure if I could get used to a 4cyl after what I've been used to.

Any thoughts on 4 vs. 6?

Skip, I'm really not a good one to ask about off-highway mileage. My 'Bu gets used so infrequently that I complained to my wife the rotors, which should be bright and shiny, were rusting! :eek:

I did notice, however, the wife appears to get about 17 mpg's around town. Most of her trips are less than a mile at a time. I really can't give a good example of prolonged city driving.

My wife drives roughly %75 city, %25 highway. She doesn't baby the accelerator, nor does she drive in "granny mode". Her MPG is 22.8, and her average speed is 27 MPH. I hope this helps in your decision.

Most of our trips have been in the 150 to 200 mile range. Our speeds are usually about 60 for half the trip and 75 the other half. Mileage at those speeds avg around 29 MPG.

Most of our trips have been in the 150 to 200 mile range. Our speeds are usually about 60 for half the trip and 75 the other half. Mileage at those speeds avg around 29 MPG.
That's exactly why I posted this Thread. So it appears keeping it at 60 mph didn't really have much of an effect.

That's exactly why I posted this Thread. So it appears keeping it at 60 mph didn't really have much of an effect.

2 MPG is a pretty good difference.

Skip,

100 % city/urban/short trip driving. I get 17/18 mpg. I'm a lead foot.
DIC average speed is 18 mph +/- 1.

2 MPG is a pretty good difference.
At $4/gal, 31mpg comes to 12.9 cents per mile, at 29 mpg it comes to 13.8. Spread that across 50K miles and you see a $450 in savings. At $5/gal the savings increases to $555.

You're right, Lee. That is pretty significant.

I did some driving this week and heres what the DIC told me. I used cruise control and there was no traffic to bother me.

100% Pure highway, meter reset when I got up to cruising speed for the first time.

Cruise control set at 65mph - 31.2 mpg.
Cruise control set at 70mph - 31.8 mpg.

The road was mostly flat and instant mpg ranged from 27 to 34 normally. I noticed when I put the car at 70mph, that it seems like it kicked into one gear higher which is probably why I got better mpg.

Edit: I should also mention that the results were derived from driving the same piece of road, but in different directions.

I did some driving this week and heres what the DIC told me. I used cruise control and there was no traffic to bother me.

100% Pure highway, meter reset when I got up to cruising speed for the first time.

Cruise control set at 65mph - 31.2 mpg.
Cruise control set at 70mph - 31.8 mpg.

The road was mostly flat and instant mpg ranged from 27 to 34 normally. I noticed when I put the car at 70mph, that it seems like it kicked into one gear higher which is probably why I got better mpg.


BuckyFan....

This is great information, considering 95% of my driving is highway, the 65 to 70 mph difference is great to know.

Thanks again.

BuckyFan....

This is great information, considering 95% of my driving is highway, the 65 to 70 mph difference is great to know.

Thanks again.

NP. Glad to help :) Normally you have more wind resistance at 70mph which makes for worse economy, but here it didn't seem to be a problem because I think I hit 6th gear instead of being at a higher RPM in 5th.

I'd really like to try it at 75mph locked in, but thats 10mph over and I don't want a ticket.

Good Point BuckyFan....There has to be a fine line somewhere.

Wonder if with Tiptronic in 6th how it would do?

Where are the shift points on the 6 speed?

I have a little insight on this. My wife and I traded in an 07 HHR with a 2.4 4 banger 4 speed and she drives about 120 miles a day. The drive is 80% highway and 20% City and in the HHR she would get an average 26-27 mpg. In our new Malibu 3.6 v6 6 speed with 6,000+ miles she gets about 24-25 average mpg.

It's important to note here that HHR the 2.4 used mid grade gas or higher
which is not that big of a deal (works out to about $3 a fill-up) but it does help offset the drop in fuel economy between the Malibu and the HHR.

One other thing to note is that when we first got the Malibu she was only getting 22-23 mpg. At about 5,000 miles and the first oil change the car jumped up to 24-25 mpg.

The info posted in this thread leads me to question why the EPA rates the 6 cyl Malibu at only 26 MPG highway. I know they lowered the numbers recently to be more realistic, but they seemed to have lowered this vehicle too much.

Doug, 26 mpg's is easy to get in this car. I don't understand it either.

We're heading to Tucson in mid August and with 900 miles of highway driving I'm expecting 30+ mpg. But, I guess we'll see.

Looks like this summer will provide a lot of good insight to the gas mileage of the V6. Let's keep the numbers coming in.

Thanks to everyone who has posted, I am finding this very useful.

I drive hilly I40 in western NC between the Old Fort exit and Asheville daily for work, in addition to a roughly 5 mile stretch of two-lane road from Old Fort to my house and maybe 1/2 mile of city streets in downtown Asheville (and 1x weekly trips through town on Patton Avenue), so call my driving 95/5 hwy/cty, with lots of grades. My averages are pretty routinely 30+ right now, with the best so far being 31.2. That's manually calculated from the trip distance / gallons of fuel to first cutoff for each tank. The DIC has actually normally been .5 - 1.5 mpg more optimistic, actually showing over 23 on one tank.

The EPA 26 highway is no lower for this car than for any other under the new system. It's all about folks that drive more aggressively, lots of A/C, stop'n'go, etc. complaining because they never got what was on the stickers before. In reality, the sticker is meant to be less about what you or I will get than about allowing us to compare how two or more different cars compare under identical conditions. I personally found the old (pre-07) numbers to be just a tad low for most cars I've ever owned too. Not that it matters, since most folks will be happy now, including me- with the feeling that *my* car is so much better than the EPA predicted! ;)

Edit: forgot to mention my average speed- normally I follow the speed limit, though lately I've experimented by running 60 or the speed limit, whichever was lower. I have to say, it's made no real difference going 5 mph slower for most of my interstate drive. My 07 Avalanche picked up 2 mpg doing that though. Less frontal area + a good coefficient of drag helps the car get by at higher speeds I guess.

I have two routes that I can take to work, both require a lot of hills and is 80% highway and 20% city. One route is 10 miles (one way) and I get 19.5 MPG through one week; the second route is 13.7 miles (one way) and I get 23.5 MPG through one week. Both instances I try and hypermile. I believe that 20% city is what really kills me (that and the hills). I have calculated that the shorter lower MPG route is actually more fuel efficient; even if I only got 17 MPG on the shorter trip, the ratio appears to equal that of more miles with the higher MPG. I calculated that my longer route has to be 25 MPG to match the shorter route. I'm kind of disappointed but I wanted the extra horsepower and the LTZ (I didn't want to wait for the 4 cyl LTZ).

Edit: forgot to mention my average speed- normally I follow the speed limit, though lately I've experimented by running 60 or the speed limit, whichever was lower. I have to say, it's made no real difference going 5 mph slower for most of my interstate drive. My 07 Avalanche picked up 2 mpg doing that though. Less frontal area + a good coefficient of drag helps the car get by at higher speeds I guess.


The best I ever got in my Avalanche was 18 MPG on a trip to Indianapolis.

Now I have to take it to New Hampshire next week. Gas is going to kill me.

My 07's best was on my trip from Asheville down to Warner Robbins GA. Just over 23 mpg for that run. I believe there's a lot more downhill on that trip, so that's probably why the number was so good. But the trip back it still broke 21 mpg. It definitely likes long interstate steady state cruising over city driving!

My 07's best was on my trip from Asheville down to Warner Robbins GA. Just over 23 mpg for that run. I believe there's a lot more downhill on that trip, so that's probably why the number was so good. But the trip back it still broke 21 mpg. It definitely likes long interstate steady state cruising over city driving!

2Wd or 4WD? Mine is the 4WD with Z71 package.

2Wd or 4WD? Mine is the 4WD with Z71 package.

4WD LTZ, 5.3l w/4.10 axle. I was one of the ones speculating that the AFM stays engaged longer on the lower geared vehicles because the engine can pull longer in 4 cylinder mode at the increased RPMs (vs. the lower RPMs that the taller rear-ends would cause). Your tires might also have higher rolling resistance than the 20" street-oriented tires mine had.

4WD LTZ, 5.3l w/4.10 axle. I was one of the ones speculating that the AFM stays engaged longer on the lower geared vehicles because the engine can pull longer in 4 cylinder mode at the increased RPMs (vs. the lower RPMs that the taller rear-ends would cause). Your tires might also have higher rolling resistance than the 20" street-oriented tires mine had.

The AFM came a long while after I bought my 02 Avalanche!

Just drove from Detroit to Milwaukee through Chicago - 400 miles. Hit construction in Detroit and Chicago. Also had to stop at 5 toll booths in Chicago. Fuel economy was 29.3mpg. DIC told me 31.1mpg Wish I matched the DIC info, but still pleased with the mileage.

Had the car locked in at 70mph with the cruise control

Hey Guys,

I'm glad to here some of these numbers for the V6 fuel mileage as I ordered a 09 V6 LTZ and I was abit worried about the mileage. But you can't go wrong with a 6. I'm driving a 2002 protege 5 now so this will be quite a step up.

I'm especially impressed with your results for that trip, BuckyFan. I lived in that area for over three years, and the highways / tollways tend to mess with fuel economy a bit compared to my more hilly but way less congested drive here in western NC. I'd have expected 25-26 with the 3.6l in the conditions you were in. Even more impressive is that you nearly hit 30 at 70 mph- I drive 65 max around here to get the 30+ that I've been seeing (last tank was 28.7 though :( - racing 75 or so in a 70 with a car full to get to doc's on time 2x during the tank).

I do my best to hypermile and never touch the brakes.

I love having the cruise control on the steering wheel where I can go up or down by one MPH. When i'm approaching another car, and it looks like I'll have to hit the brakes, I hit the - button a couple of times to take a couple of MPH off without hitting the brakes. I then can go back up to 70MPH in 1MPH increments which according to the DIC, used less gas to accelerate than me stepping on the pedal.

Some of these MPG numbers are incredibly low (one guy was in the 17 range?). I've been thinking about trading in my 2004 LT V6 for an LTZ, but I can't imagine why the mileage would drop below 30. On the highway, I'm usually in the 34-35 mpg range, and the city is around 27-29, which usually averages out around 30 mpg. I wonder if cargo makes much difference here? My trunk is usually empty except when my golf clubs are in there. I haven't noticed much mpg diff when my teenagers are riding with me.

My 2004 Malibu V6 has been great, but I am disappointed to hear that after 5 years of advancement, the new V6 mpg on the highway would be dropping from 35 to ~30 or below. That is crazy. Why would they do this??

One thing I noticed and was mentioned in another thread was that the the higher the speed the better the MPG :confused: but on a recent 1300 mile round trip to Tucson,AZ. coming across the the desert with the cruise set at 75 I was getting 32.3 MPG according to the DIC, and with AC. could the V6 and 6spd be ahead of the power curve at the higher speeds, RPMs were at 2100 on the Tach :cool:

Some of these MPG numbers are incredibly low (one guy was in the 17 range?). I've been thinking about trading in my 2004 LT V6 for an LTZ, but I can't imagine why the mileage would drop below 30. On the highway, I'm usually in the 34-35 mpg range, and the city is around 27-29, which usually averages out around 30 mpg. I wonder if cargo makes much difference here? My trunk is usually empty except when my golf clubs are in there. I haven't noticed much mpg diff when my teenagers are riding with me.

My 2004 Malibu V6 has been great, but I am disappointed to hear that after 5 years of advancement, the new V6 mpg on the highway would be dropping from 35 to ~30 or below. That is crazy. Why would they do this??

You do realize that the 3.6 is pushing about 70 or so more horses than your 3.4, right? That's a huge difference, not to mention the weight factor.

One thing I noticed and was mentioned in another thread was that the the higher the speed the better the MPG :confused: but on a recent 1300 mile round trip to Tucson,AZ. coming across the the desert with the cruise set at 75 I was getting 32.3 MPG according to the DIC, and with AC. could the V6 and 6spd be ahead of the power curve at the higher speeds, RPMs were at 2100 on the Tach :cool:

IIRC, the guy who got better numbers from 65 to 70 or 70 to 75 was going different directions. It's possible that on the way there, going the lower speed, he had a slight incline and on the way back, going faster, he was going slightly downhill. That would be my guess as to why that happened.

I average about 24.5 mpg, but I only have about 3000 miles on the car and it keeps improving. I drive about 70% highway and 30% city.

The wife has traveled 2,374 miles and averaged 25.452 mpg

Ken

4th of July travels on the v6 6spd. 70-80mph... no cruise, fair amount of hills, about 80 degrees, good traffic flow. Averaged 32mpg on the highway.

On my first trip out with it I varied between 67 and 72 mph and I also made two un-needed stops (still in break-in) the DIC read and average of 29.2 with an average speed of 56 mph. I thought this was pretty good for a car that weighs as much as it does but still according the Edmunds.com will do 0 to 60 in 6.6 seconds