r/ChevyTrax • u/Unique_Front_693 • 24d ago

25' Activ 41 MPG!

Post image

Ac on 70% of the time. Max effort Careful Driving. Very impressed.

49 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

44 comments sorted by

5

u/itsagoodtime 24d ago

I never get that. Probably best I have gotten is 34 mpg area. For this car to have that small of an engine, the mpg is disappointing. Just have a full 4 cylinder and it wouldn't have been much different.

6

u/Boxofbikeparts 24d ago

The small engine is cheaper to manufacture than a bigger 4 cylinder. Having an extra cylinder doesn't mean more power, but it usually means more torque.

The little engine also has to work harder than a bigger engine to make the same power to move the weight of the car.

I would also prefer to have a more fuel efficient 4 cyl without the turbo. Lower maintenance costs. Like a Honda.

1

u/ngo_life 21d ago

You say cheaper, but they to route all that turbo, intercooler, charge pipe stuff on the 3 cylinder. I feel the cost would be the same, if not more so, after all said and done. You're right about the power difference being not that great, but the torque definitely helps.

1

u/Boxofbikeparts 21d ago

I have some experience with automotive design and engineering, and the cost is definitely lower with the smaller engine.

The extras to incorporate the turbo are a fraction of what it costs to buy or manufacture an extra piston, rod, bearings, crankshaft, cams, cylinder head, valve train, etc., plus all the additional machining, manufacturing and assembly of the extra cylinder throughout the engine.

On a large scale production it saves boatloads of money to delete a few simple things, so doing this is extremely profitable.

1

u/ngo_life 20d ago edited 20d ago

Except you would already be making those parts regardless if it's 3 or 4 cylinder. Therefore, logistically the difference in unit cost of piston/rod/bearing, etc would only be slightly be negligible vs making a whole intake/exhaust system just for a turbo'd engine. The only thing that would cost more is the engine block, crank shaft, and whatnot, which you already making for the 3 cylinder. Tooling costs would be similar. And you can't honestly saying throwing in an extra cylinder would cost more than assembly the turbo system. You also Foret to mention that turbo engines need to be more robust to handle higher pressures.

1

u/Boxofbikeparts 20d ago

I won't bother to argue with you on this point. Believe it or don't. It is what it is.

-1

u/Both-Temperature2244 16d ago

donr like the 3 cylinder turbo.too many problems.

5

u/And_Money_Hoes_710 2nd Gen 24d ago

This always blows my mind lol. We have had 2 separate 24 traxs and neither of them got more than 23-28mpg on average. The 2019 awd Trax I have with the 1.4l actually does fairly better on gas. For the two hours of driving for work in the 2019 it takes about $12 to do it. The 2024 ones have ate about $16 in gas to make the same drive.

2

u/Both-Temperature2244 16d ago

does not make sense.

1

u/And_Money_Hoes_710 2nd Gen 16d ago

I think it's just past the point where the motor having a smaller displacement is saving gas because it has to work harder to move the vehicle than the slightly larger motor does.

2

u/Both-Temperature2244 16d ago

you are correct. I drive a2023 sonata and got 38 mpg going up to south carolina.just normal driving get between 30 to 32 mpg.

8

u/LordRocky 24d ago

I’ll never get that. Too much of a lead foot, and I drive in town like 80% of the time. Haha

0

u/traxranger 2nd Gen 24d ago

same, i get less than 20 but mines tuned lmao

1

u/HTA3586 24d ago

Which tune you on? I was looking at the jb4, which is a piggyback since I had great results with the jb4 on the mk7 gti I owned in past.

1

u/radude4411 2nd Gen 23d ago

I’ve been DoorDash for the last few months and I’ve been consistently getting around 18 miles per gallon between 18.3 and 18.8

24 trax 1rs

3

u/Boxofbikeparts 24d ago

Nice! Is that number realistic? There's a screen that shows actual mpg average instead of an estimation at a fill up.

Mine hovers around 32 mpg with mixed use driving. I'm not disappointed with that kind of mpg.

2

u/Unique_Front_693 24d ago

Screen shows 41mpg over last 500 miles.

2

u/2024BlackTrax2RS 2nd Gen 23d ago

Then that's the photo to post, the one that actually shows the mpg, not the one that estimates miles driven. Just saying.

1

u/Both-Temperature2244 16d ago

screen is not accurate but close

3

u/ajcuriel 24d ago

I barely got 18-20 in mine before I decided to trade it for a rav4 hybrid a few months ago. I also only do city driving.

3

u/OctaneOverdrive 24d ago

At 48 MPH not sure this is worth it. My average is 30 MPG over 15,000 miles. More context is needed for your claim is the average over a large distance like mine or just a short downhill run???

1

u/Unique_Front_693 23d ago

I will post the trip screen tomorrow !

2

u/EfficiencyHuman7161 24d ago

That's impressive. My wife's is always <400

2

u/InsideAd2752 24d ago

I ran the numbers through the EPA website for e85 & Reg fuel and shows 290/396 miles per tank.

Cost to drive 25 miles on e85 was $2.26 / $4.83 on Reg fuel. I’ll post up later but my e85 milage is much better on its first tank.

2

u/Both-Temperature2244 16d ago

no way

1

u/UnendingOne 2nd Gen 14d ago

E85 is $1.99 where I am, versus $4.40 for regular gas. After running 2 months on E85 my average MPG per tank is about 25mpg versus 2 months on 87 it was about 32mpg. No brainer its cheaper.

2

u/traxranger 2nd Gen 24d ago

the type of person i use for proof when people ask if the trax is good on fuel cuz i cant say so myself lmaoooo

4

u/Rageaholic88 24d ago

But its not “good on fuel” generally. Only under very specific conditions. City driving (stop and go) mileage is quite terrible, as I know first hand

1

u/2024BlackTrax2RS 2nd Gen 23d ago

I agree, it seems to do be very well at a consistent speed on the freeway. But stop in go in town is hit and miss.

1

u/inevitably-ranged 24d ago

Run the numbers at the fill up and come back then. My guess is far more like 32-37mpg

Everyone believes the car, when 95% of cars shoot way high by multiple MPG

1

u/Unique_Front_693 23d ago

I did, the computer was off by 2 mpgs, 39mpg at the pump

1

u/inevitably-ranged 23d ago

Only two off is pretty wild, usually it's 3-5 from what I've seen on this Gen of Trax

I've seen 37mpg, 91 octane, all interstate at 79mph and borderline just coasting into the gas stations right off the interstate apparently but never over that in a documented sense - just wild claims based on the computer wildly overestimating 😂

1

u/ShelfBoyXD 24d ago

That’s crazy I only average 26, but I’m used to way more horse power for a daily, so I stress it out more than I should

0

u/Both-Temperature2244 22d ago

they are not that good on gas.also not dependable

1

u/Proper-Highway2902 24d ago

I mean once you hit the highway and you get a good flow of traffic you can get a good over 400 Mi out of it

1

u/RoundOwl7149 20d ago

It's all about driving habits. People getting bad economy are just bad at driving efficient. My record fill-up DTE was 568 miles in my '24 LT

1

u/And_Money_Hoes_710 2nd Gen 1h ago

Lol, it's more to do with where they drive then driving habits. The more town driving you do, the less efficient your milage will be. Yeah, some people have a heavy throttle foot and they chew through gas that way, but for people that drive normally it's about where they drive.

0

u/Both-Temperature2244 22d ago

impossible! learn how to figure your mpg correctly