[inyrmnd]

I've been commuting 1hr each direction (50 miles) every day in my 9-3 SC 60th Anniv. Ed. and been testing out my mpg for accuracy and curiousity in different situations. Here's a brief synopsis of what I've experienced:

33.5 at a steady 70 mph hwy
31.5 at a steady 80 mph hwy
29.0 at friggin' 90 steady!!!

I love that I can achieve this data in what I consider a larger hatchback. In fact, I've never had a car that could pull this off. I did, however, notice that the rates went down 1-2 mpg with my a/c on. Also, I'm getting anywhere between 22-28 mpg city and I usually fly around town.:evil:

Care to share your mpg stories?

 

[brickwalls]

93 SportsCombi 2.0t Auto Australian variant, only had it 45 days and hoping it gets better after run-in:

Notes on calcs: Australian Gallon is same as the International Gallon.

USA Gal 1 = 0.833 Int Gal = 3.875 Litres

ULP - USA AKI vs. International RON

86-87 AKI = 91-92 RON - Regular / Int Standard,

89-90 AKI = 94-95 RON - Mid-grade / Int Premium [also = E10]

90-94 AKI = 95-99 RON - Premium

These calcs are for ULP RON95 fuel at 110kmh/70mph on highway cycle, carrying three people and three surfboards on roof racks, travelling between 110 to 220 km [70/140ml] each way on Cruise Control with Air-con all the way.

Up to the first 30 day service first at 1500ml/2400km - [I'm guessing the factory setting were probably set richer for this run-in period]:

70mph/110kmh hwy >

US Mpg = 22.7

Mpg = 27.3

Km/100l = 10.4

Since then:

70mph/110kmh hwy >

USmpg = 27.8

Mpg = 33.4

Km/100L = 8.5

Also from experience Cruise Control tends to be more reactive than I would be, and so shave a bit of economy. Not the best but I'm expecting the economy to peak at the 6 month mark. I don't want to talk about the city cycle.

I had a same horses out of a 6 cyl 2.5L MG ZT [heavier vheicle too] that had an amazing 8 butterfly natural aspirated VIS intake setup - 2 throats per cylinder [1 long & 1 short with 1 butterfly per cyl] with a balancer butterfly between each set of 3 cyls, and then the main throttle butterfly. It would return the same Mpg at 110kmh [70mph] right through to 180kmh [112mph] returning 30Mpg/25USMpg/10.5L/100km then only tapering away to a speed limited 225kmh [140mph]. The 93 2.0t turbo seems to just suck it linear at speed - and steep at that. [ NB: I haven't had it over 130kmh/80mph for any period yet during run-in - waiting waiting waiting - nearly n e a r l y]

 

[kyabmo1]

I'm getting 35mpg hwy at 65-70 ac on, and 37mpg hwy ac off. I've got an '07 60th anniv SS with MT. Still breaking it in with just over 1200 miles, I don't have to feel guilty when I'm over 5K RPM now.

 

[Aspen]

you guys are doing better than me. I am getting 23mpg Imperial city and about 34mpg on the highway. That is with an auto and conservative acceleration. US equivalent would be 19/28

 

[Maliberti]

I commute 100 miles a day R/T.
Average speed on the freeway is between 65 - 75 mph.
The 45 minute commute each way averaging 28.1 mpg.
Long road trips on the freeway where I don't stop for 1 hour or more I get around 32 mpg.
In city, stop and go I am getting 24- 26 mpg.

Not too much of a difference.

I use Premium gas only(92/93).
I have the 2.0 T with auto tranny.
The hwy miles are similar to what I was getting with my 95 with a V6/3.0 t, city driving was 18-22 mpg.

 

[Krieg]

With about 1500 miles on the clock, I'm only getting 25.2 mpg in mixed suburban/ highway driving.

The problem is me. I drive like an ***. I race from stoplight to stoplight. Whenever I get the opportunity on the highway, I'm doing 85 to 90 mph.

You know, I drive the 9-3 like it SHOULD be driven! If I'm not flipped off by someone every day, I just don't feel right.

I only put Amoco Ultimate in it. Turbos deserve the highest octane available.

 

[awjones]

city avg: 27mpg

highway avg: 34mpg (best I ever had was 36.7mpg)


I had some horrible numbers running 89octane for 2 weeks. never again:x

 

[coldwake81]

I'm surprised by how much lower fuel economy the larger engines get.

When on flat terrain, using 93 octane gas, going 55 mph with a 2.0t I can regularly get over 40 mpg (the SID shows 43-45 mpg but the true number is never that high).

However, I drive mostly short city trips so my day to day fuel economy is around 25 mpg give or take a mpg or two.

 

[Cosmicflash]

I've got as high as 29.4 mpg on the highway going less than my desired speed with the V6.
Clipping along at 80-90 mph I've recorded about 26.5 mpg or so. Window sticker says 28 mpg so I'm getting about the right range.
I've got as low as 22 mpg in mixed city/hwy driving.
My 03' 2.0t would do 4-5 mpg better on the highway than the 2.8T V6.

The 2.0 can be quite the fuel misers if driven properly.

 

[inyrmnd]

33.5 at a steady 70 mph hwy
31.5 at a steady 80 mph hwy
29.0 at friggin' 90 steady!!!



My figures are all obtained with 87 Octane since I'm cheap with gas and, although not as good with the turbo engines, I never know the difference since I've never filled her up w/anything else. If someone wants to give me proof that it's better for your engine, I'm sold. I haven't seen any empirical proof yet. Anyone?

 

[ctrlz]

Care to share your mpg stories?

I swear by Tsunami TMPGEnc DVD authoring with divx support.

I get about 27.5 mpg in mixed driving (2.0T, BSR Stg1, 6 spd). My economy improved steadily over the first three years. It peaked when I tossed that useless OnStar box!

 

[monsaab]

2007 9-3 S/S with a little over 700 miles.
We're averaging 20.7 MPG. It is a short highway trip to work, five or so miles and a little secondary road driving. 87 octane fuel. The dealer supposedly filled it with a higher octane when we piked it up, but the MPG have been much the same. Next tank of fuel I will try a higher octane.

 

[brianl703]

According to SID I got 34MPG on I68 which crosses several mountains...the downhills are steep enough that you'll speed up 20MPH (in 5th gear) by the time you reach bottom.

I've gotten as high as 38MPG before, 20 miles of 70MPH interstate and 20 miles of 55-60 secondary road driving..

 

[Hugh]

I recently did a 4000+mile return trip to mid-west states. As the SC had about 5K on the clock at the start,I thought it was about time to see what the gas consumption was at various highway speeds and octane ratings.

Following should be noted:
-tires were 17"(not 16") and kept at 35 PSI
-cruise control and AC used at all times
-load was 2 adults and approx 150 lbs luggage,etc
-consumption figures based on actual measured useage...not the SID
-Sunoco used for all fill-ups but one(Shell)
-figures are US
-route was all Interstates with little or no elevation changes

Using 87 octane at 2375 RPM or 75 MPH------28.3 MPGal
Using 89 octane at 2375 RPM or 75 MPH------29.4 MPGal
Using 93 octane at 2375 RPM or 75 MPH------30.1 MPGal
Using 93 octane at 2260 RPM or 70 MPH------32.6 MPGal

Considering that the AC was on all the time plus the load and fact that SC with AT is more than 100+ lbs heavier than the SS,I am satisfied with these figures at this time.I found no perceptible difference in performance at 75 MPH between 87 and 93 octane,so given the huge premium we pay in Canada for 93 vs.87,I guess I'll keep on using 87 octane in Canada.

 

[new92xowner]

I recently did a 4000+mile return trip to mid-west states. As the SC had about 5K on the clock at the start,I thought it was about time to see what the gas consumption was at various highway speeds and octane ratings.

Following should be noted:
-tires were 17"(not 16") and kept at 35 PSI
-cruise control and AC used at all times
-load was 2 adults and approx 150 lbs luggage,etc
-consumption figures based on actual measured useage...not the SID
-Sunoco used for all fill-ups but one(Shell)
-figures are US
-route was all Interstates with little or no elevation changes

Using 87 octane at 2375 RPM or 75 MPH------28.3 MPGal
Using 89 octane at 2375 RPM or 75 MPH------29.4 MPGal
Using 93 octane at 2375 RPM or 75 MPH------30.1 MPGal
Using 93 octane at 2260 RPM or 70 MPH------32.6 MPGal

Considering that the AC was on all the time plus the load and fact that SC with AT is more than 100+ lbs heavier than the SS,I am satisfied with these figures at this time.I found no perceptible difference in performance at 75 MPH between 87 and 93 octane,so given the huge premium we pay in Canada for 93 vs.87,I guess I'll keep on using 87 octane in Canada.

What was the disparity between SID and actual mpg?

 

[inyrmnd]

Using 87 octane at 2375 RPM or 75 MPH------28.3 MPGal
Using 89 octane at 2375 RPM or 75 MPH------29.4 MPGal
Using 93 octane at 2375 RPM or 75 MPH------30.1 MPGal
Using 93 octane at 2260 RPM or 70 MPH------32.6 MPGal

This is pretty good news for folks using reg 87 octane. I do it because I don't see any point in getting from point A to point B for 40 more cents a gallon, especially if SAAB themselves recommends 87 or better and claims that they should run fine on 87. I'll throw in 89 or 93 occasionally to boost my mph.

Thanks for the extensive research.

 

[common gnd]

This is pretty good news for folks using reg 87 octane. I do it because I don't see any point in getting from point A to point B for 40 more cents a gallon, especially if SAAB themselves recommends 87 or better and claims that they should run fine on 87. I'll throw in 89 or 93 occasionally to boost my mph.

Thanks for the extensive research.

i don't know which saab you drive.. but last time i checked, saab recommends 90+ octane for my car? they do say we could put in something lower but they say we will lose performance.

 

[inyrmnd]

i don't know which saab you drive.. but last time i checked, saab recommends 90+ octane for my car? they do say we could put in something lower but they say we will lose performance.

I checked my manual last night. SAAB recommends 90 (for my 07 9-3 SC), and states that if you want to use anything lower, don't use anything below 87. Nowhere in the manual does it say you WILL lose performance. That is a man-made construct, and though likely true, the difference between 87 and 90 octane in a turbo4 will produce minimal results. It does say, however, that if you were to experience minimal engine knocking while using 87 Octane, it would be perfectly normal. SAAB has some kind of engine/oxygen/octane system set up to take 87 Octane if necessary. Mine never knocks and runs amazingly on 87. Therefore, I'll keep using 87 and save some dinero while I'm at it. If it knocks oneday, I'll answer it then (as I knock on wood).

BTW, everyone's car is listed under their name if they want it. Just like yours.

 

[DanS]

Auto five speed with 2.0 T using 92-93 octane. The mpgs have all been with spring/summer/fall temps. I've already noticed a drop with the cooler temps.

I've gotten as high as 38.5 mpg at 55 mph.

The normal is 31.7-32 mpg at 73 mph.

It gets closer to 31 mpg around 75.

The 07 seems to a couple mpg better than our old 2001 9-3 4 speed auto 2.0t.

 

[GWC]

I swear by Tsunami TMPGEnc DVD authoring with divx support.

Interesting ... with no takers in over a day it looks like the intersection of the PC savvy group and SAAB group is limited ...

I have what may be considered the nightmare commute for a 2.8T in terms of fuel milage ... warm up 30 seconds or so until revs drop followed by three exhilarating miles and park. Repeat in about 10 hours. This gets me about 19 on the SID. I have not checked that against reality. I'm generally using 93 octane.