Hello, Elantra owners..
Looks like we will be getting compensation from Hyundai related to their innacurate mileage claims on the selling stickers of their cars.
I have a 2010 and have complained since I bought it. I heard every story under the sun about why I am not getting better mileage.
http://www.wptv.com/dpp/money/consumer/hyundai-kia-gas-mileage-case-epa-finds-hyundai-kia-overstated-gas-mileage-claims
So the mileage claims come from EPA tests. The EPA tests the vehicles andassigns the numbers. So why is Hyundai getting nailed?
I would assume Hyundai/Kia are passing the bill(s) over to whomever for the incorrect EPA readings to get reimbursed, as its not the manufacturer who states the mileage numbers, they receive a confirmation and then its advertised.
I cant complain with mine but since im going to the dealership this weekend for maintenance, I will see what I can get out of this here in Canada.
True, the EPA is the one who made the claims, Hyundai just posted those readings on the "sticker" on the window. Hyundai shouldn't be paying these people, the EPA should. It doesn't seem to be Hyundai's fault. They just posted what they were told.
Be sure to voice your comments on this subject on our current Facebook post:
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=286076558170870&id=497253636953035¬if_t=share_comment
i can easily get 40mpg from my '12 veloster as long as i dont drive like an asshole. i'm averaging 34 right now, driving like i stole it.
... déjà vu .... remember the engines rating fiasco?
The EPA doesn't run the tests, the car companies do (or they contract it out), following the EPA guidelines. The EPA will only do spot checks every year, to keep everyone honest.
Looks like someone was too eager to claim that they achieved >40 MPG. They don't seem to be learning from past mistakes....
Canadian press release:
TORONTO, Nov. 2 – Hyundai Auto Canada Corp. and Kia Canada Inc. today announced that they are correcting the fuel consumption ratings for approximately 172,000 vehicles sold between 2010 and 2012.
Procedural errors at the automakers’ joint testing operations in Korea led to incorrect fuel consumption ratings for select vehicle lines. As a result of the corrections, Hyundai/Kia average combined fleet fuel consumption ratings are increased for the 2013 model year by 0.3 litres per 100 kilometres.
“I sincerely apologize to all affected Hyundai and Kia customers, and I regret these errors occurred,” said Dr. W. C. Yang, Chief Technology Officer of Hyundai/Kia research and development. “Following up on the EPA’s (Environmental Protection Agency) audit results, we have taken immediate action to make the necessary rating changes and process corrections..” The U.S. EPA certification is accepted by Environment Canada for auto imports into Canada.
Both companies are putting in place a comprehensive reimbursement program for affected current and former vehicle owners to cover the additional fuel costs associated with the fuel consumption rating change. Customers will receive a personalized, pre-paid credit card that will reimburse them for their difference in the combined fuel consumption rating, based on the average fuel price in their region and their own actual kilometres driven. In addition, as an acknowledgement of the inconvenience this may cause, we will add an extra 15 percent to the reimbursement amount. Current owners will be able to refill their pre-paid credit card at any time for as long as they own the vehicle. Prior owners of affected vehicles who have already sold their cars will also be reimbursed using the same formula. For more information about reimbursement and a complete list of eligible vehicles, customers can visit www.hyundaifuelconsumption.ca and www.kiafuelconsumption.ca.
Hyundai Motor America and Kia Motors America are working cooperatively with the EPA to correct fuel consumption discrepancies. The fuel consumption rating discrepancies resulted from procedural errors during a process called “coast down” testing at the companies’ joint testing operations in Korea. Coast down testing simulates aerodynamic, tire rolling resistance and drivetrain frictional losses and provides the technical data used to program the test dynamometers that generate fuel consumption ratings. Affected vehicles and their before-and-after fuel consumption estimates are shown in the attachment.
With the adjusted fuel consumption ratings, the Hyundai and Kia brands will continue to deliver competitive fuel consumption performance in the industry and will continue to advance improvements in fuel efficiency through technology and innovation.
“Fuel efficiency, low emissions and safety are top priorities for us; they are built into every vehicle that we sell,” said Steve Kelleher, President and Chief Executive Officer of Hyundai Auto Canada Corp. “We are very sorry about the errors and we are committed to making sure the owners of every affected Hyundai vehicle are fully compensated. We want to assure them and all of our customers that the environmental features and characteristics that are so important to Canadian drivers are equally important to us.”
“A large part of Kia’s success has been our ability to produce vehicles that meet both consumer and environmental needs,” said William Lee, President and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Kia Canada Inc. “Kia Canada deeply regrets that this situation has occurred and will ensure all affected Kia customers will quickly receive fair compensation.”
Yves
If I recall correctly (I read the EPA MPG procedures a little while ago), the manufacturer conducts the test in accordance with EPA set procedures. The EPA then has the ability to audit and/or conduct their own tests. The EPA does not test every car, rather the manufacturer is responsible for the testing. So if Hyunda/Kia used improper testing methods, well that's a shame but they are doing the right thing by making it up to the customer. The fact that the EPA took so long to find the error, well that is a HUGE disappointment and tells me their controls are pretty poor.
This also explains why I never had an issue with my Sonata's MPG's (as it isn't on the list). That's a shame, I could've used a bonus before Christmas time
http://hyundaimpginfo.com/
The real mileage is on the page. And I am also wondering why Hyundai is getting singled out by the EPA.
I have to wonder if the goal is to hurt sales and help U.S. car makers.
so the adjustment is 1mpg on the combined rating? That's what they're bitching about? REally? For crying out loud. STFU already.
I stand corrected. But I agree with Bob. For one MPG, is it really an issue?
Since I'm a numbers person. . . lets put some numbers behind this issue. I will apologize in advance for my sarcastic tone. I consider myself to be fairly frugal yet extremely sarcastic. I also do my research prior to buying a new car so I knew exactly what I was getting in to. I will also preface the following discussing by saying, I would have bought my GT whether it showed 39/27 on the window or the revised 37/26. I am however happy that I now will get a gift card every year especially because I do plan to keep this car for quite a while and pass it down to my son when he turns 16 (unless they come out with a turbo model )
Time to get on my
Say Eileen Dover bought a 2012 Hyundai Elantra. Eileen has an easy highway commute and puts on 15,000 miles per year. She bought the car expecting to see 40MPG, but now has learned that the figure should have been 38 MPG. Eileen is devastated. In a year, assuming all highway (which we know isn't very practical), she was expecting to have consumed 375 gallons of fuel (15,000/40 MPG). At a price of $3.50 per gallon she would have spent $1,313 on gas for the year. Now instead, using the revised highway rating of 38 MPG, she will burn through a whopping 395 gallons of gas. Again using $3.50 per gallon, she will actually spend $1,383 on gas for the ENTIRE YEAR. Ohh my, I now know why Eileen is devastated. She will spend on average $70 more for gas for the entire year. She will plunk down $5 on a cup of coffee, each day, but heaven to betsy, she now needs to make room in her budget for an extra $70 worth of gas over 365 days/52 weeks/12 months. That comes out to roughly $6/month. Damn if she would've known that, I'm sure there is no way she would've plunked down 20k on a new car.
Now unfortunately for Eileen Dover, her husband Ben Dover, also bought a 2012 Elantra. He, on the other hand drives a normal mix of highway & city miles and puts 12,000 miles on his Elantra each year. He too bought the car solely based on the EPA estimates (he really preferred the uncomfortable Civic). So for Ben he was expecting to see 33 MPG on average, but instead now has found out that it will be 32 MPG. Using the same assumptions above he originally was expecting to spend $1,274 on fuel, but now he will have to dig deep in his pockets to shell out $1,313. His YEARLY budget just went up by a whopping $39. Looks like he is going to have to cut out a couple Big Macs from his diet to afford that increase!
Ok, so basically what I am getting to is if you really shelled out 15-20k for a new car solely to save anywhere from $39 to $70 per year on gas, then yes you have a right to be mad. But if you did your research, knew about consumer reviews, read magazines where they did their own reviews and assessments and then bought the car because you liked the features, price and the fact that it got good gas mileage, then be happy that you are now getting a "gift" from Hyundai. If Hyundai/Kia purposely skewed their tests to overstate their mileage, then shame on them. I can't believe that they would purposefully do this though given the fact that the EPA does monitor it and could come in at any time to test the manufacturers claims. In either case, it seems like a lot to do, about a little from my perspective at least
I will end my rant with one final thought
Hey- also.
People suck. That is the #1 reason I'm fixed and we're not having kids. Dogs rule. That is all.
I'm getting the mileage that was posted on Serenity's car sticker. 33 mpg combined and I'm a happy camper. So on the claims website, the article says we can refresh the debt card as long as we own the car. Might I be getting around 90 bucks a year until I sell it? If anything bugs me, its not the fuel economy, but that my in-car avg is way off from my actual mileage.
Perfect rant, Alex.
Honestly, I am pleased with my MPG but definitely will take this offer to have some "extra" cash here and there. But this doesn't make me look at Hyundai any less - my car is great and got better mileage than my previous car and a lot of others on the road currently.
Whats this world coming to...
Kia Soul 2.0l drops 6mpg, that's pretty bad.
Hyundai/Kia will have a black eye from this.
Even if I was offered the money, I wouldn't take it on principle. This is a stupid, unfounded bullshit claim that is just a scam for people with buyer's remorse to get some cash. Greed. Pisses me off is what it does.
It's not the actual numbers that bug me. I agree with everyone; a couple of difference in MPG is nothing to sneeze about and it would certainly not prevent me from buying the car. The problem, as I see it, is that yet again, the company has claimed slightly inflated numbers to gain a market advantage for several years before getting caught. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that it was an honest mistake. Let's face it: in marketing terms, displaying a big 40 mpg number instead of a 39 is significant. It's like advertizing a car for 19999 instead of 20511 (same percentage of error in both cases); there's a definite, proven perception by the public that the 19999 car is a much better deal, even though there's really only 2.5% difference.
In Canada, the magic fuel consumption threshold seems to be that anything < 5.0 l/km highway is fantastic (It is quite good, like 48 mpg US). Well guess what, the elantra has been marketed with a 4.9 hwy number. Now they have to bump it up to 5.2, making it a competing choice with anything and everything that lands between 5.0 and 5.9. Much less fantastic (but still extremely good, from a subjective standpoint) for someone buying with fuel economy in mind.
In the end, there's nothing wrong with the car, but I can understand how some people feel that they have been taken for a ride. Me, I don't really care, I don't own one and will likely not in the near future, but you sure won't see me argument ever again for Hyundai in the fuel consumption threads.
Yves
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2012/11/02/kia-hyundai-gas.html
https://hyundaifuelconsumption.ca/
Hey-I admire Hyundai for stepping up to the plate for their customers rather than denying the discrepency in mileage with court resolution.
When I purchased my 2005 Tucson the rated mileage wasn't even close to what you really get. I am very happy with my 34 combined driving on my 2013 GT. BUT.... I am sure people with the older models are more "injured" by this oversight. Sometimes it makes you wonder what is done to stretch the numbers for advantage of the company or what is just a simple mistake. Remember when Honda was sued for the speed odometer not being correct causing the car to rack up miles faster and get out of warrantee faster? My Tucson was off by 4 mile per hour and my new GT is off by 2 miles per hour. It is funny how they always read "Higher" to the company's advantage and not "lower". I love my GT and respect Hyundai but I am not going to say that they might not try to push the numbers like everyone else. The problem in the US is we have more lawyers than anything else. Even our leaders are lawyers. (No offense to any members who are in this field)
though I've only owned my HD for a few months now, this is going to effect me quite a bit coming up in December as I'll be driving across the country. I'm already having slight problems with my speedo showing +1km for every 10km/h, meaning, when I hit 110, I'll only be going 100km/h, well below the speed limit of most highways in the parries. I've brought it up with my dealer a couple times now, but they claim they can't do anything about it at all. if anything happens for this in the near future for me, I'll be grateful.
Wow, so looks like I have a 2 MPG difference. According to my math I'll be getting ~$120. I will never say no to free money.
I have gotten well over the 40 MPG highway, but way less in the city. I think the "city" EPA numbers contain too many variables to pay attention to.
Got this a few weeks back from Wilmington, DE to Alexandria, VA (~120 miles). It was up to 45.5, but once I got off the highway it went down to 45.1.
I was vilified on the other thread when I dared to post that I knew there was a mileage issue with my Elantra, and many others. Now that it has been confirmed I could easily say I told you so but that won't accomplish a thing.
The mileage rating for the Elantra was a HUGE factor in our deciding to purchase the vehicle. Because of the economy we are in a precarious financial situation and every penny counts. We needed a new vehicle due to our other being totalled. Gas mileage was important because every dollar saved goes right to our son's stomach.
A few dollars from Hyundai as part of a serttlemnt will not be good enough to compensate for many years of lower than expected gas mileage.
Don't tell me to sell the car, I can't afford to take the financial hit. I could go on about this but again what is the point? It would be nice if some of the posters who skewered me would say they were sorry, but I doubt that will happen.
Oh, BTW last fill up, under 28 MPG and don't anyone dare tell me it is our driving. It's the car, the government verified it. So those of you getting 40 or more should thank your lucky stars.
Right now I am steaming, maybe I will calm down but I doubt it. And this will certainly be my first and last Hyundai. Whoever at Hyundai was behind this deception should be punished severely. But I'm sure they'll continue to be paid their generous salaries while me and many other Hyundai owners stuggle, no thanks to their lies.
Baess, they dropped the combined MPG rating by 1. And for highway it went from 40 to 38. To me that is not a very significant drop to warrant such a distaste and anger. Read my previous post in this thread about the amount of dollars you are looking at. Basically anywhere from 50 to 80 per year depending on your mix of driving and number of miles put on the car. EPA numbers are an estimate and to me I think its a shame that it took them 3 years to realize Hyundai was using improper variables. That doesn't sound like very good controls on the EPA's part. If Hyundai did improper tests on purpose (which I am skeptical they did) then certainly shame on them. But also shame on the EPA to take so long to determine the ratings weren't proper
My car is rated at 39 MPG on the highway, yet I got a hair over 40 on one trip up to Charlotte. Now they dropped the EPA rating to 37. That being said on a trip to Atlanta cruising at 75-80 and then hitting some traffic around Atlanta I only got about 32MPG. There is a definite drop-off once you take the car over 65.
What about the other factors that affect gas mileage? The type of gas, your elevation, the climate? Wind resistance? The traffic? Do you do most of your driving in the city versus the highway? Have you tried Ethanol-free gas?
Im sorry that you have had a bad experience with your Elantra but I wouldn't blame Hyundai. So their advertising was off (by one MPG?) but if the sticker was correct the first time and said 39 MPG would you still have bought it?
Hyundai as a whole is a great car maker. They have publicly apologized and are attempting to make amends. They realize their mistake and have given people a way to make up for it. I'll be sticking with them for years to come because of this.
I'll quote from a newspaper article I just read.
The apology and payments aren't mollifying all owners. "My mileage sucks. It's not even close to what they claimed," said Howard George, a retiree, who otherwise likes his 2012 Elantra. "The debit card would be bupkis."
That is exactly my sentiment. Even with the change to 28/38 we are not routinely achieving those numbers, which we should. I guess I have to believe the numbers are now accurate but apprently this vehicle is way sensitive and must be coddled to get those numbers. On my previous vehicles I met or exceeded EPA numbers. And like I said in the other thread, you don't see hundreds of posts and complaints from Cruze, Civic and Corolla owners about their mileage.
I'm sure there is more to it than just this slight recalculation.
I'm just upset that I can't claim my 2003 as a trouble car... I mean after 255Kkms on the clock and can still achieve the ratings while driving it like I stole it from time to time, this little mixup is anything but a typo.
I have passed the info onto the In-laws who have a new Accent, and the neighbour has a new Rio - but I don't see what the big stink is about it. Yes they mis-calculated, but they've come up and admitted it. Now what about the other manufacturers that are also claiming high numbers and yet not hitting them?
Sure, it may be conceived as a jerk-move to be the first in the industry to "hit the magical 40mpg", but was anyone else close to doing so? Having a change in 2mpg is nothing, but I feel they're doing a smart move to offer the money back based on local prices and amount you've driven. I'm not so sure about the extra 15% though.
I only get about 9.5l/100km which is aprox 24mpg... it's pretty pathetic. I rarely go over 2k rpm so it's not like i'm driving it hard. i figure i'd get at least 33+ which i would have been satisfied with.
when i first got the car and noticed that i wasn't achieving anywhere near 40mpg everyone said it would go down after i break the engine in but i've only noticed it go up.
eco button seems to make it go even higher.
I drive about fifty-fifty between city and highway driving and I'm averaging 33 mpg combined. For the first five or six fill ups I had Eco mode on and couldn't get above 33 mpg combined. From my seventh fill up and on I've decided to turn off the Eco mode and I'm actually getting past 33 mpg combined. One thing I noticed between having eco mode on and off is that the in-car indicator becomes slightly more optimistic w/o it on. With it on, It would be about 2 mpg off, w/o it on it's close to 4 mpg off.
Baess and Andy, if your mileage is off by as much as you say and you've checked all the normal factors (tire pressure, air filter, etc) then I would take it to the dealership and have them look at it. Heck you need to bring it there to have your mileage verified to get your debit card, but maybe there is something else causing you to achieve such low mileage. I know Amanda (Iheartmyredcar) had an issue with her's which was causing very poor fuel economy. I know my body style is different, but i have the same engine and if I baby it I can see 40 on a highway. If I drive like a bat out of hell trying to get to a meeting on time cruising at 75+ on a windy day I could still get 32+. The GT is rated slightly under the sedan too. If you aren't seeing those types of numbers, then I do think there has to be some underlying cause.
To me, the revised numbers are pretty spot on and for the first 3k miles on my car I can easily achieve them. If I was still living outside Philly, well I know my MPG would drop by a fair amount based on the amount of traffic and stop and go driving there. Here in the Carolina's traffic is much easier to handle!
Baess: You never seem to have been happy with your car, and just bring all that negative energy to this club. Instead of looking at the fuel usage logically, you spout flame and hatred towards us and Hyundai when we try to tell you things that could be done, and numerous member who are getting the stated mileage if not above. You dont even seem to look for anything positive about the car, just the single negative item. I for one am tired of the negativity. So please stop or leave and sell the car since its making you so "unhappy".
on a fill up with my 2010, I'm lucky if I hit 400km out of the tank. I bought this car hoping it would be better than my old SUV was, but it was getting near 500 per tank. . . This has me confused all to hell, car is going in on the 15th of this month. hopefully all is sorted out, I do like this thing currently.
Brad / Andy - that sucks that both of you are having problems (being fellow Canadians I understand the numbers better).
I know you both have different model cars, so it seems like there is something different going on with both of you (different engines and transmissions).
Do you reset the trip computer each fillup?(believe the 11+ does this automatically?) Are you calculating off actual distance and fillup amounts? I know if I get a horrible rating within the first 100-200kms, it'll be a task to make it change by the end of the tank according to the computer, same goes for getting a good value.
Not to rub it in, but I'm averaging about 8.5L/100km with my 256Kkm 2003. Which will take me 600-700kms per tank.. not sure of the tank size differences of our 3 models. If the traffic is nice of if I make trips out of the city I can get that down around or under the 7 mark. If a full tank is on highway, I've seen as low as 6.4 (well I did hit 4.7 in one tank, but that was just after filling up outside Hamilton, then going down the mountain.. and didn't last long). I use regular Esso/Petro gas, and am usually carrying around a bit of extra stuff in the trunk (amps, sub, wooden floor). I found that if I keep my rpms between 2k and 3k I achieve the best results. Keeping below 2k is only useful is barely moving, and not needing to pull power from the engine. I did try a tank where I attempted to keep things below 2k and just let the car pull itself to speed. Not only was that a painful week of being passed, but I didn't see any benefit from the extra effort.
I'd bring them into the dealerships, not mentioning the new EPA rating thing at first, and just say that you forgot to mention your poor mileage (kilometerage?) last time you were there. Do you by change keep your fuel receipts? I'm starting to do so, as well as tracking them in a spreadsheet so I can balance the cost of ownership/maintenance vs getting a new car... :-).
For IHeartMyRedCar's issue, http://www.elantraclub.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=32830. Believe it ended up being a bad wheel sensor, but also related to her HID's being on, so a power drain.
I'm not getting the advertised MPG on my Forte SX. I want a debit card too!
So last night I went to the compensation estimator page to see how much I might possibly get. Being that I'm already getting and surpassing the claimed 33 mpg, which is now changed, I figured I wouldn't get much. It estimated about $15 in compensation, Hyundai can keep that as a token of my loyalty.
Speaking of the EPA, I wonder if they will double check the other car companies that claim the mighty 40 mpg. Hyundai/Kia may not be the only one that might have some errors in their testing process. I don't think it will be fair to pick on Hyundai/Kia and let the other companies sit around pretty and not get checked too.
baess... Silentwolf does make some valid points. I mean, don't get me wrong, this is an open discussion forum and people not happy with their cars can certainly speak out. They are welcomed to do so...
But, at a point, why bother posting at a "fan club" of the Hyundai Elantra if you only post negativity about the Elantra?
Logic says that since most here like their vehicles, the negative posts will be met with resistance.
You kinda give off the troll vibe being so negative at a pro-Elantra/Hyundai/Kia community like EC.
For right or wrong this is just how you are perceived here.
So you say that you've tried everything. Have you tried Ethanol-free gas? I've had plenty of friends who own a slew of different types of cars try it out and see their MPG go from the upper 20's to low 30's up to and beyond 40. They may have been driving with a lead foot, and changed it when they pumped in the EFree gas. Who knows. But I would try that out if you can. You may be surprised and see a difference.
Although I'll say this here, as I've said it elsewhere, I didn't see my jump in MPG's until my car hit a decently high amount of miles on the ODO (75k+/-). I could say that before then I was averaging maybe 28-32? Now I average 38-40, give or take my maintenance, inflation (a thing i tend to let slide more than I should..), and which area of VA I'm in at the time.
Here's an article from USA Today's Chris Woodyard. I love Hyundai's response. Really shows how uninformed the author is.
I came to this forum after finding and reading other posts on the gas mileage issue at neutral sites such as Edmunds. The gas mileage issue is where my focus has been so that is why the majority of my posts have been in that thread.
I've only been a member of one other dedicated auto forum and that forum doesn't seem to mind when people post about problems with their vehicle. In fact that is one of it's main reason for existing, to help solve problems. And again other than the mileage posts (where the Civic comment came in) my few posts have been innocuous.
I didn't introduce myself with a thread titled "Pet Peeves with my Elantra" and similar as has been done by others. And even with those types of posts those posters didn't get the negativity back that I did for posting about a gas mileage issue on a thread not started by me.
Thanks to the ElantraClub for helping me out. Not that I really neeed validation but I've seen enough posts about poor mileage at this "fan club" to know the problem is real.
baess... no one is questioning your right to be unhappy about your mileage. But when I buy a car there are many elements to it.. style, performance, amenities, mileage. Honestly if you are buying a car only with fuel economy as your criteria, a hybrid makes the most sense.
We've given you our best explanation of how you might be able to improve your mileage or why your mileage may not to be up to par. There's always the dealer who can inspect for mechanical defects. We did what an internet forum does... discuss. Not to your satisfaction but we did discuss your issue.
My main concern is that your membership in EC is based on only one thing... complaining about your mileage ad nauseum.
I need to get some paper work together for sure... for my wifes Kia Soul, my old Elantra and my inlaws 2012 accent. I'm the paper/service guy for them so they'll have to file but my wife has under 20K - inlaws is around 5k but my elantra had 86,000 miles...
Hey Vinnie, the adjustment is for 2011 and up vehicles.
Aww, shit. I looked at the site last friday and swore I seen 09 but damn.
Either way there's the 11 soul and 12 accent... for which not much compensation would come.
We didn't buy the soul for mpg haha thats for sure. Wife wanted a SUV and she was looking at redulous vehicles then she fell in love with the soul when I showed it to her.
The mother-inlaw just retired so a vehicle which was cheap, simple to work on and reliable... only the accent fit the bill.
I die when I hear how people made their decision to buy a car solely on mpg claims.
Unfortunately the 2011 Soul doesn't get it either. I hate to be that guy! Here's a link to the https://hyundaimpginfo.com/overview/affected-models.
But your mother inlaw will get something for the Accent. She'll get double what the Elantra guys get because their combined # changed by 2 MPG. It seems like a really easy process they have set up. The only "hard" part is you have to go into the dealer to get the miles verified.
sneeky sneeky.... lol. I looked at this below and heard the $5.00 check coming lol.
Cha Ching! Haha...I was looking at the Hyundai site.
Actually the 2011 soul isn't included sadly. If you go to kia's site, under the 2011 models only the optima is included. Only 2012+ Souls are affected by this.
Yeah I seen that. What I was getting at was I seen the pic I posted and thought... sweet... till I clicked the link lol.
Ah, to be honest I'm letting Hyundai keep the money as I said earlier. I'm loving Serenity and I doubt I'd be as happy as I am right now with another car. Unless that other car might be a turbo elantra
Just went in and had my mileage verified. I was in there for maybe 3 minutes as they typed it up. Easiest $103 I've ever made....except for that one time in college. But that's neither here nor there.
Mine only says an estimated amount of $29 but hey, I'm now $29 richer than I was before! Plus, if I am understanding everything correctly you will continue to get paid....nice!
Yep, you'll continue to get paid as long as you own the car.
Also, make sure you fill this out: https://hyundaimpginfo.com/assets/content/Hyundai_MPG_Claim_Form_Final_(110212).pdf and submit it via email, fax or mail.
Thanks for that Frank! I didn't know I had to fill that form out as well. I am taking the car to the dealership Wednesday AM for oil change and the 7500 mile check up so it told me to have the dealer confirm my mileage and such too!
Hey-I'll get two cards. One for the '11 Elantra I traded in, which will be a one time payment, & one for the current GT.
well this sucks. . . originally it had the 2010 on there, then it removed it. . .
Now to figure out what the actual problem is then!!! yay?
My 2002 GLS 4 speed automatic averages 29-30mpg combined, in the summer -- and that's mostly suburb driving 5 miles to work and back (plus extremely short trips to get lunch) with a few freeway trips a month. I beat the daylights out of it every where I go -- I'm NOT a gentle driver. I also have heavier after market rims and ultra high performance all season tires (NOT low rolling resistance). Oh, and I'm forced to buy ethanol gas too.
And 11 years later, with a 6 speed auto transmissions, a smaller 1.8L motor, variable valve timing, low rolling resistance tires, better aerodynamics, and other tricks... the combined average for an Elantra is only 2mpg more (32 mpg)?
Wow. We sure haven't come that far.
So wait explain this to me:
I went to Hyundai's website and my estimate is $56.37. *slap in the face* For averaging 23 mpg and 14000 miles on the car??? really Hyundai?
Anyway. What is this about continuing to get paid? I am confused.
Hey-owners of Hyundais that qualify for compensation will be paid yearly as long as they own their cars.
but i read somewhere that you can claim money more than once a year. is this true?
:Hey-I've not seen nor heard of that.
I heard they provide you with something along the lines of a debit card and place the money on there yearly. I am going to the dealership for an oil change tomorrow and get my paperwork going for this so I will ask some questions to try and clear up confusion!
My car was at the dealer today for other reasons but looking at the paper work it say "Tech completed Recall P15, Mileage Verifiacation (P15PROG1) MPG ODOMETER Verification and documentation. Thier web site says you can e-mail, mail, or fill out the info using their web site. My guess is you only need to fill out the web site info and the dealer does this verification when the car visits the service center (automatically). The web say you should file a claim each calendar year (not automatic) but you MUST file your first claim before 2 Nov 2013. It also says you can file more than one time per year. So you could file every 6 months if you wish.... I plan to file in Jan for the time from purchase (Sep) until 31 Dec. Then again the next year and the next year until I no longer own the car. The amount will change based on the area you live, average gas price for the claim period, the car you have, etc...
Got the ball rolling on my money making car now - I should be receiving a "credit card" in about two weeks since the dealership finished up all of the paperwork to include my current mileage and verify everything. Since I registered online I will have to go on it every year, until I no longer own the car, and update the mileage so I can continue to get reimbursed - which is what everyone else will be doing as well.
baess before I ban you, let me say you're an ass. I'm not a "fanboi" by the way. I run an excellent Elantra community and know when someone has no desire to be a real community member.
I get it... you bought the car with mileage as a priority and you're extremely disappointed. You don't need to make that a theme of every post you make.
Good luck at your next community.
And BOOOM goes the mighty Ban Hammer...
Finally! Thanks Mitch, it smells better in here already!
No more gas leaks, huh?
Got my card in the mail.
I got the email conformation last night saying it was on it's way!!
Is the Est MPG on the dash (approx) correct?
Emily, the consensus is that the trip computer is .1-.2mpg over the calculated value, which comes out to a difference of 1-2% typically. Still, it's most accurate to calculate it the old fashioned way.
-Roy
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)