Now With Less Thirst: Hyundai Reveals Gas-Sipping 2017 Elantra Eco

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

Hyundai sent its newly redesigned compact away for a lifestyle change, and it returned as the fuel-sipping Elantra Eco.

Sporting a new drivetrain and an EPA-estimated highway fuel economy rating of 40 miles per gallon, the 2017 Elantra Eco retails for $21,485 (after freight). City and combined ratings are 32 and 35 mpg, respectively.

The 2017 Elantra Limited we tested was no gas guzzler, often surpassing its 37 mpg highway rating, but the new Eco clearly has its competitors’ 40-plus mpg ratings in its sights. It’s also possible that Hyundai still has some lingering guilt over the not-yet-forgotten gas mileage scandal of four years ago.

Powering the Elantra Eco is Hyundai’s newest mill, a turbocharged and direct-injected 1.4-liter four-cylinder making 128 horsepower and 156 pounds-feet of torque. A seven-speed EcoShift dual-clutch transmission is the only mate for this engine.

Hyundai brags that the economy-minded Kappa engine reaches peak torque at 1,400 rpm. Despite its lowish horsepower rating, the 1.4-liter’s torque rating beats the stock Elantra’s 2.0-liter by 24 lb-ft.

The boost in low-end grunt, plus the quick-shifting gearbox, should be enough to motivate the Eco away from a standstill better than its not particularly quick stablemate, all while using less fuel.

How does the Elantra Eco’s mpg claim stack up against its competitors?

The Chevrolet Cruze (which shares a 1.4-liter displacement) is rated better on the highway (by 1–2 mpg) in all but the top-level Premier trim, which matches the Eco. The Hyundai beats all Cruze trims in the city by 2 mpg.

The Honda Civic — every compact car’s nemesis — beats the Elantra Eco on the highway by 1–2 mpg in automatic-equipped models, but only matches the 40 mpg rating with its manual 2.0-liter model. Again, the Elantra Eco is less thirsty in the city than the Civic, making the two model’s combined ratings the same (for automatics, anyway). The combined rating of the manual 2.0-liter Civic is 4 mpg lower.

Mileage aside, Hyundai saddled with Eco with a high level of amenities borrowed from the Elantra’s Limited trim, including a full suite of driver’s safety aids and convenience options.

[Image: Hyundai Motor America]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 21 comments
  • INeon INeon on May 07, 2016

    Those aren't very good numbers for a 1.4t, are they? Chrysler gets an extra 30hp/30tq out of their 1.4t in the Dart without the DI?

    • Ponchoman49 Ponchoman49 on May 09, 2016

      Even the new Cruze is managing 153/177 out of there revamped 1.4T engine so yeah those numbers are pretty low.

  • Davefonz164 Davefonz164 on May 08, 2016

    Hyundais keep getting better over the years. That being said, I see more and more of them as rentals and fleet cars here in Montreal, is that the case elsewhere?

  • ToolGuy First picture: I realize that opinions vary on the height of modern trucks, but that entry door on the building is 80 inches tall and hits just below the headlights. Does anyone really believe this is reasonable?Second picture: I do not believe that is a good parking spot to be able to access the bed storage. More specifically, how do you plan to unload topsoil with the truck parked like that? Maybe you kids are taller than me.
  • ToolGuy The other day I attempted to check the engine oil in one of my old embarrassing vehicles and I guess the red shop towel I used wasn't genuine Snap-on (lots of counterfeits floating around) plus my driveway isn't completely level and long story short, the engine seized 3 minutes later.No more used cars for me, and nothing but dealer service from here on in (the journalists were right).
  • Doughboy Wow, Merc knocks it out of the park with their naming convention… again. /s
  • Doughboy I’ve seen car bras before, but never car beards. ZZ Top would be proud.
  • Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
Next