Hyundai Santa Cruz Forum banner
1 - 20 of 57 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
808 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So looking at another vehicle that has already the 2.5 and 2.5T engine options, a 2.5 liter Sonata SEL is rated 31 MPG Combined, 27 City/37 Hwy⁠. The Sonata N-Line 2.5 Liter Turbo is rated 27 MPG Combined, 23 City/33 Hwy.

Granted they aren't identical trims, but we're looking at a 4mpg loss going turbo.

The 2022 Tucson AWD (because I am thinking the 2.5T may be only on upper trims that include AWD standard in the Santa Cruz) is rated 26 combined, 24 City/29 Hwy.

Assuming the Santa Cruz drops 1 mpg on the highway due to aerodynamics, that would be 26 combined, 24 City/28 Hwy.

Drop 4mpg for turbo, and that would be 22 combined, 20 City/24 Hwy. To put that into perspective, the Honda Ridgeline AWD is rated 21 combined, 19 City/24 Hwy, so that seems about right. A fullsize Dodge Ram 1500 4WD with its 400hp Hemi is rated is rated 19 combined, 17 City/22 Hwy.

So while the Santa Cruz will be easier to get in and out of and park and what not, it doesn't seem to me it'd be much of a fuel sipper unless you go with a 2.5 naturally aspirated in FWD trim. Once you go turbo + AWD, I think you're starting to approach the fuel economy and perhaps even cost of a fullsize truck, especially if you look at offerings like the Chevy Silverado RWD turbo-diesel, which is rated 33mpg highway (granted diesel fuel costs much more than 87).

Thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
808 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Ah, didn't realize that model also has the 2.5T, even better comparison. Yeah, I see that here, and those are AWD numbers: 2021 Hyundai Santa Fe AWD

So that's 2MPG higher than my guesstimate, and probably more accurate.

What is VERY interesting to me, is that unless I'm looking this up wrong, the 2.5 naturally aspirated FWD model on the Santa Fe gives very little fuel economy improvement over the turbo AWD: 2021 Hyundai Santa Fe FWD

Turbocharged AWD:
24Overall MPG
City MPG:21Highway MPG:28


Naturally Aspirated FWD:
26Overall MPG
City MPG:25Highway MPG:28

I drive mostly highway, which if it turns out the same, the AWD turbo would be a no brainer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
It's sickening to me that in 2021 we are still getting such abysmal mpg in trucks (and many vehicles, in general). Even more reason for them to come out with a Hybrid, PHEV, or BEV option in the Santa Cruz.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,242 Posts
It's sickening to me that in 2021 we are still getting such abysmal mpg in trucks (and many vehicles, in general).
Pickups are heavy and as aerodynamic as a shed. Even your typical CUV is kind of boxy and heavy compared to vehicles from the 80s / 90s. If you put a modern powertrain in something like a CRX it would get 60 MPG I bet... but wouldn't pass any crash tests thus couldn't be sold today.

So in general mileage is not an engine problem its a vehicle size problem (shape and weight). For example my Corvette gets 17 city / 29 highway despite having a 460HP V8.

I'm guessing it will be within +/-2 of 19 city and 27 highway for the turbo AWD Santa Cruz. My experience with previous turbos is they get very good mileage if your not in boost constantly. AWD might be the bigger MPG sucker here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Established facts (from Hyundai website)
santa fe 4411cw 21/28/24 mpg (awd + turbo + also the heaviest)
tucson 3700cw 26/33/29 mpg (awd + no turbo + much lighter)

My Guess using deductive reasoning from above numbers:
Cruz 4200cw 23/29/26 mpg (awd + turbo + in-between weights)

I imagine the MPG's could be slightly better than we think if they tuned the **** out of this thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,242 Posts
My Guess using deductive reasoning from above numbers:
Cruz 4200cw 23/29/26 mpg (awd + turbo + in-between weights)
That would be really great. I estimated slightly lower since a pickup's shape isn't as slippery aero wise as a CUV shape. The bed cover will help. Hopefully removing the CUV weight over the rear end will offset the poor aero so it could be a wash in the end.

Regarding AWD: looking at the Santa Fe manual (same engine and transmission as the SC) it appears the system is part-time, the 4WD lock releases at speeds over 37 MPH. At that point the rears are only driven if the fronts lose traction. This likely greatly improves highway mileage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
808 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
The bed cover will help.
Probably end up the same, as on the Silverado they have a XFE fuel economy package that includes a bunch of mods to get you 1mpg extra including a lightweight tonneau cover, and the cover itself they said was like 0.1mpg difference, because the highway improvement is negated a little by the small extra bit of mass in stop-and-go. Mostly they are just really practical for securing and protecting your junk in the back.

Its a shame we won't get a hybrid version, as they could have great weight balance by putting the lithium battery in place of the spare tire way in the back, and on the Tucson it bumps it up to 38mpg city and highway on the blue trim and reviewers are saying the little electric boost off the line really makes it feel peppy with its 227hp. That said, the SC gets a turbo which the Tucson doesn't, and should be even better performance. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,242 Posts
Its a shame we won't get a hybrid version, as they could have great weight balance by putting the lithium battery in place of the spare tire way in the back, and on the Tucson it bumps it up to 38mpg city and highway on the blue trim and reviewers are saying the little electric boost off the line really makes it feel peppy with its 227hp.
Very true... however the battery pack likely hurts the payload and towing capacity which might be why they are not offering it (yet). Maybe a hybrid will come in later models if the SC proves to be popular. As you stated in another post most truck shoppers don't care about mileage so Hyundai is likely hedging their bets knowing most would rather haul stuff then gain those last few MPG.

Since my V8 Dakota gets 14/19 and a pathetic 11 MPG while towing anything the SC offers will be a massive improvement for me. The Ranger with its turbo 4 manages 19/26, so the SC should out perform that in FWD and hopefully manage to match or even exceed it in AWD.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Since my V8 Dakota gets 14/19 and a pathetic 11 MPG while towing anything the SC offers will be a massive improvement for me. The Ranger with its turbo 4 manages 19/26, so the SC should out perform that in FWD and hopefully manage to match or even exceed it in AWD.
As a proud owner of a 1.6T AWD Kona - I can tell you that the HTRAC system is quite amazing in snow, at least. When you lock the AWD via a button, it's actually a challenge getting stuck in a reasonable amount of snow. It just does VERY well. Thing is a **** snow leopard. This is on all season tires that came with the car from factory.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
808 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Very true... however the battery pack likely hurts the payload and towing capacity which might be why they are not offering it (yet).
So I was until recently oblivious to the fact that all hybrid Tucsons are imported from the Ulsan plant in Korea with only 1% domestic parts content. Its only the 2.5 engine ones that are made in the Alabama line w/ 50% domestic parts. I understand that the SC won't be made in Korea at all, that's likely why we'll only be getting the 2.5/2.5T variants, and also makes me lean much more toward the Santa Cruz to support the US economy over the hybrid I was otherwise considering as the other front runner.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
I'm sure everyone's been curious about the official stats on this. Fairly disappointing considering you have to go to the Limited for the better features...


Gutted they aren't coming out with a hybrid out of the gate. Maverick is gonna steal some on-the-fencers, IMO...
 

·
Registered
TBD
Joined
·
49 Posts
I'm sure everyone's been curious about the official stats on this. Fairly disappointing considering you have to go to the Limited for the better features...


Gutted they aren't coming out with a hybrid out of the gate. Maverick is gonna steal some on-the-fencers, IMO...
Nice find on the EPA ratings. I think those numbers are pretty disappointing when compared to other midsize and even some half tons. I'm hopeful the real world MPG is better for most people since the highway rating is 27. Hyundai messed up not offering a hybrid right out of the gate. Especially since this is marketed toward the younger, city dwellers. I really like the SC and have been following this for years, but I think the Maverick might sway me. Tuesday will be very interesting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
808 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
I'm sure everyone's been curious about the official stats on this
Nice find, so turns out my original prediction of 22mpg combined for the turbo was right on the money after all, although I underestimated the disparity between city and highway performance.

Also surprised that there's no fuel economy benefit to FWD like there is with the same engine/transmission on the Tucson, which gets bumped 3mpg combined on FWD. Looks like turbo is also going to be AWD only, which I guess makes sense as the N-Line Sonata is said to always have traction issues with the 2.5T.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,242 Posts
I'm guessing it will be within +/-2 of 19 city and 27 highway for the turbo AWD Santa Cruz.
I nailed it. Do I win a prize? :p

I wonder if the gear ratios for DCT are part of the reason for lower city ratings, IE: does this have a really low first and second gear to optimize acceleration / off road capabilities?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
808 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Could just be a higher than expected curb weight combined w/ being AWD at lower speeds that you mentioned before? You'd think with 8-speeds it would have plenty of ratios to choose from as is for a torquey turbo engine.

Although a little bummed at first, the more I think about it, I drive almost all highway anyway and this is 87 octane, so while I can do 18/19mpg on the highway with the hemi powered Ram, that's with 89 octane that I usually fill with 93 in the summer since Costco gas is so cheap and they don't carry midgrade. So I'll still have a big fuel savings, AWD for great launches, the 8-speed wet DCT is getting a lot of praise and is certainly a huge upgrade to the old 6-speed slushbox I have, and while the Ram does fit in our garage you have to back it in so you're about an inch from the back wall and while backing fold the driver's mirror by hand (its not auto) to clear the entrance, and to get out I put a bumper material on the wall for the door lip and a fat person wouldn't even be able to get in and out LOL! So the SC would provide a lot more lebensraum.

I'm also curious to see what the turn radius numbers are on the SC, as I'm still on the fence for it or the Tucson on which its based, and just putting a hitch on the Tucson to rent a small trailer for the times I need to haul a bunch of mulch or whatever.
 

·
Registered
2022 SEL AWD * Non-Activity
Joined
·
1,188 Posts
MPG numbers look oaky. I will happy give up a little MPG for the additional cubic inches over some of the other 1.3T-1.6T motor offerings.

HEY! What's with the FWD non-turbo having lower highway mileage than the AWD? Something is amiss...
 
1 - 20 of 57 Posts
Top