MPG and your reasons!!!
Discussion
mp3manager said:
Except when moving off from a junction or lights.
I don't expect a 0-60 dash but I do expect reasonable acceleration away from a standstill.
In my Integra DC5, I block change from 1st, 3rd to 6th at 3k rpm, and I'm still being held up by slow-ass, driving-miss-daisy diesel drivers.
Same thing happens when I'm driving the truck with an auto-box and pulling 35tons!
I move off at a speed that allows me to keep up with traffic. I don't expect a 0-60 dash but I do expect reasonable acceleration away from a standstill.
In my Integra DC5, I block change from 1st, 3rd to 6th at 3k rpm, and I'm still being held up by slow-ass, driving-miss-daisy diesel drivers.
Same thing happens when I'm driving the truck with an auto-box and pulling 35tons!
daemon said:
mp3manager said:
Except when moving off from a junction or lights.
I don't expect a 0-60 dash but I do expect reasonable acceleration away from a standstill.
In my Integra DC5, I block change from 1st, 3rd to 6th at 3k rpm, and I'm still being held up by slow-ass, driving-miss-daisy diesel drivers.
Same thing happens when I'm driving the truck with an auto-box and pulling 35tons!
I move off at a speed that allows me to keep up with traffic. I don't expect a 0-60 dash but I do expect reasonable acceleration away from a standstill.
In my Integra DC5, I block change from 1st, 3rd to 6th at 3k rpm, and I'm still being held up by slow-ass, driving-miss-daisy diesel drivers.
Same thing happens when I'm driving the truck with an auto-box and pulling 35tons!
Indeed it doesn't have to be a diesel engined car for it to be slow off the mark at the lights, that is far more likely to be down to the driver, than the vehicle type.
ORD said:
daemon said:
I move off at a speed that allows me to keep up with traffic.
Are you sure you don't change up at 2000rpm? I bet you do, mpg chops! 
. Studio117 said:
Don't care for it. I simply wouldn't put up with some of these frankly stupid commutes via car which require +30mpg.
More to life than that.
Work takes me all over the country, other than a change in career, which I wouldn't mind to be fair, there's not a lot I can do about it. The office is 4 miles away, so a reasonable walk if I've not much to carry with me.More to life than that.
Depends on individual needs.
Now retired with no daily to-from grind to complete, MPG is of little importance. There was a time back in the 60-70-80s when I did higher mileages as my job involved much travel. Then I traded down and got an economical petrol engined second car which even driven briskly averaged about 40mpg. Paid mileage allowance so it did not come out of my pocket. During the 1970s was provided with a company car and all fuel costs found, even for private use. However, even though I would tank up with fuel for the weekend, the travel and demands of my job during the week left me tired so I rarely took advantage of that "free" fuel. Stayed in to recharge.
Completed a 320 mile round trip in my petrol 2 litre turbo last week. Outbound, did not drive with economy in mind. Fully loaded car for return trip so avoided Motorways and drove smoothly and economically using relatively traffic free A Roads on return. Still did not hang about averaging 50-60 mph. Brim to brim checks showed a 32 mpg. Had I driven like that for the whole trip, would have been nearer 40mpg. I usually only get 25 mpg from the car and less when pressing on a bit. That turbocharger boost can be addictive.
Back in those faraway days, I could tank up and get change from two quid.
Great days gorn forever. How long now before two quid a litre, not a tank full!
Now retired with no daily to-from grind to complete, MPG is of little importance. There was a time back in the 60-70-80s when I did higher mileages as my job involved much travel. Then I traded down and got an economical petrol engined second car which even driven briskly averaged about 40mpg. Paid mileage allowance so it did not come out of my pocket. During the 1970s was provided with a company car and all fuel costs found, even for private use. However, even though I would tank up with fuel for the weekend, the travel and demands of my job during the week left me tired so I rarely took advantage of that "free" fuel. Stayed in to recharge.
Completed a 320 mile round trip in my petrol 2 litre turbo last week. Outbound, did not drive with economy in mind. Fully loaded car for return trip so avoided Motorways and drove smoothly and economically using relatively traffic free A Roads on return. Still did not hang about averaging 50-60 mph. Brim to brim checks showed a 32 mpg. Had I driven like that for the whole trip, would have been nearer 40mpg. I usually only get 25 mpg from the car and less when pressing on a bit. That turbocharger boost can be addictive.
Back in those faraway days, I could tank up and get change from two quid.
Great days gorn forever. How long now before two quid a litre, not a tank full!
neil1jnr said:
As usual there are stupid claims of diesels doing 70-80mpg...
...On a good run my diesel leon could average 50mpg, the Fiesta ST can do about 47mpg in the same circumastances.
For new modern cars I see no reason to buy a diesel at all. To many fake claims on here of 70mpg+ averages from BMW 2L diesels etc and I just don't believe it. The only way possible I could get over 50mpg in my diesel was to use NON of the performance available all of the time. So anyone on here proclaiming these outrageous tank average mpg figures AND stating how quick or torquey there car is they are deluded as you just can't have both.
I agree....On a good run my diesel leon could average 50mpg, the Fiesta ST can do about 47mpg in the same circumastances.
For new modern cars I see no reason to buy a diesel at all. To many fake claims on here of 70mpg+ averages from BMW 2L diesels etc and I just don't believe it. The only way possible I could get over 50mpg in my diesel was to use NON of the performance available all of the time. So anyone on here proclaiming these outrageous tank average mpg figures AND stating how quick or torquey there car is they are deluded as you just can't have both.
The last diesel that I drove (a Citroen C4 1.6 Hdi) averaged 40mpg, brim-to-brim, over about 1,000 miles. On a steady motorway journey, I suppose it might have managed 50mpg.
So I'm deeply sceptical when people claim to be “regularly” getting 65mpg out of similar vehicles.
It simply isn't possible, or at least not without adopting a seriously compromised driving style.
DJP said:
I agree.
The last diesel that I drove (a Citroen C4 1.6 Hdi) averaged 40mpg, brim-to-brim, over about 1,000 miles. On a steady motorway journey, I suppose it might have managed 50mpg.
So I'm deeply sceptical when people claim to be “regularly” getting 65mpg out of similar vehicles.
It simply isn't possible, or at least not without adopting a seriously compromised driving style.
My driving style isnt "seriously compromised". I drive with the flow of traffic on the way to and from work, and i dont slow anyone else down.The last diesel that I drove (a Citroen C4 1.6 Hdi) averaged 40mpg, brim-to-brim, over about 1,000 miles. On a steady motorway journey, I suppose it might have managed 50mpg.
So I'm deeply sceptical when people claim to be “regularly” getting 65mpg out of similar vehicles.
It simply isn't possible, or at least not without adopting a seriously compromised driving style.
From my spreadsheet on the previous page, and when worked out correctly, i've been getting on average 66.5mpg over 23,000 miles measured brim to brim on each fill. My last tank there i got 70.05mpg brim to brim.
Yes, i drive with a view to economy - but its a 55mph slog anyway so i may as well try to get good mpg. Becomes a bit of a challenge really.
It *can* be done - with the right car and with the right approach to driving it.
DJP said:
neil1jnr said:
As usual there are stupid claims of diesels doing 70-80mpg...
...On a good run my diesel leon could average 50mpg, the Fiesta ST can do about 47mpg in the same circumastances.
For new modern cars I see no reason to buy a diesel at all. To many fake claims on here of 70mpg+ averages from BMW 2L diesels etc and I just don't believe it. The only way possible I could get over 50mpg in my diesel was to use NON of the performance available all of the time. So anyone on here proclaiming these outrageous tank average mpg figures AND stating how quick or torquey there car is they are deluded as you just can't have both.
I agree....On a good run my diesel leon could average 50mpg, the Fiesta ST can do about 47mpg in the same circumastances.
For new modern cars I see no reason to buy a diesel at all. To many fake claims on here of 70mpg+ averages from BMW 2L diesels etc and I just don't believe it. The only way possible I could get over 50mpg in my diesel was to use NON of the performance available all of the time. So anyone on here proclaiming these outrageous tank average mpg figures AND stating how quick or torquey there car is they are deluded as you just can't have both.
The last diesel that I drove (a Citroen C4 1.6 Hdi) averaged 40mpg, brim-to-brim, over about 1,000 miles. On a steady motorway journey, I suppose it might have managed 50mpg.
So I'm deeply sceptical when people claim to be “regularly” getting 65mpg out of similar vehicles.
It simply isn't possible, or at least not without adopting a seriously compromised driving style.
Around town, if I'm not being particularly cautious it'll get mid 40's, but I can get it into the 50's without much difficulty if I don't accelerate any quicker than anyone else.
Of course, from experience, it'll only do low 40's on the motorway if I cruise at 90 plus, but I tend not to do that since I find it takes longer to recover from high speed journeys (I tend to do 150 - 250 miles in a single trip), than the time I save by driving faster. Not only that, but since I pay for my own fuel, and 90 isn't really any less boring than 70, I tend to flick on the cruise control and listen to Radio 4 at 70 or thereabouts.
DJP said:
neil1jnr said:
As usual there are stupid claims of diesels doing 70-80mpg...
...On a good run my diesel leon could average 50mpg, the Fiesta ST can do about 47mpg in the same circumastances.
For new modern cars I see no reason to buy a diesel at all. To many fake claims on here of 70mpg+ averages from BMW 2L diesels etc and I just don't believe it. The only way possible I could get over 50mpg in my diesel was to use NON of the performance available all of the time. So anyone on here proclaiming these outrageous tank average mpg figures AND stating how quick or torquey there car is they are deluded as you just can't have both.
I agree....On a good run my diesel leon could average 50mpg, the Fiesta ST can do about 47mpg in the same circumastances.
For new modern cars I see no reason to buy a diesel at all. To many fake claims on here of 70mpg+ averages from BMW 2L diesels etc and I just don't believe it. The only way possible I could get over 50mpg in my diesel was to use NON of the performance available all of the time. So anyone on here proclaiming these outrageous tank average mpg figures AND stating how quick or torquey there car is they are deluded as you just can't have both.
The last diesel that I drove (a Citroen C4 1.6 Hdi) averaged 40mpg, brim-to-brim, over about 1,000 miles. On a steady motorway journey, I suppose it might have managed 50mpg.
So I'm deeply sceptical when people claim to be “regularly” getting 65mpg out of similar vehicles.
It simply isn't possible, or at least not without adopting a seriously compromised driving style.
I suspect those on here whingeing about diesels, are those who have not had sufficient experience in driving modern fuel efficiency orientated diesels, or those who were not able to adapt to driving them properly.
Pan Pan said:
Red16 said:
daemon said:
Heres my "best" journey to work over 39 miles
If you got a penny from every driver you hinder and annoy going to/from work driving as slowly as you do to achieve those high MPG figures you could probably commute to work for free.If people want to this they should just get a bus, or walk!
At 70 the engine in my car is turning over at barely above idling speed, it will do 40mph at idling speed in top. Therefore at motor speeds the engine is smooth, and silent, If I want the thrashing racket of a petrol engine at motorway speeds, I will use the Seven, knowing that if I am lucky, I will be getting around 20 mpg. Horses for courses.
daemon said:
Yes, i drive with a view to economy - but its a 55mph slog anyway so i may as well try to get good mpg. Becomes a bit of a challenge really.
Exactly, it's a different way to have fun. My goal in my Leon Ecomotive is to reset the range and the trip when I fill up to the brim, and the sum of those 2 must be kept over 700. As the range drops, the trip goes up, and it's a bugger to keep the 2 equalling 700+.Accelerating really slowly just means you're at low mpg for long time, rather than very low mpg for a short time if you accelerate more briskly, and doesn't make a big difference to overall mpg up to a point. Slowing down gradually rather than braking is where you can make the big savings and if you're in traffic that doest slow anyone else down.
neil1jnr said:
I think he means hindering other drivers by accelerating very slowly, not in relation to your actual cruising speed. What you have said makes sense but you cannot achieve average mpg figures like you say over a tank of fuel if you are accelerating in relation to the traffic flow, any sort of meaningful acceleration severely reduces your mpg.
If you're in heavy traffic and you look around you at junctions and how other traffic reacts its fairly clear that the traffic doesnt move off at full gusto. Moreoften theres lorries in the traffic anyway.So no i dont hinder traffic and if i do move off i make sure i'm not impeding traffic flow BUT i do make sure i change up smoothly and get to a steady speed ASAP.
I happen to have 39 miles of commute across decent roads and at a time when theres little traffic. Wrong time of day and i could get as low as 55mpg.
Merely pointing out what a diesel is "capable" of, if you drive it with economy in mind.
RizzoTheRat said:
Accelerating really slowly just means you're at low mpg for long time, rather than very low mpg for a short time if you accelerate more briskly, and doesn't make a big difference to overall mpg up to a point. Slowing down gradually rather than braking is where you can make the big savings and if you're in traffic that doest slow anyone else down.
Yes. Thats where i would be on this.I'd rather get back to a steady speed reasonably quickly rather than slowly but continuing to be on the turbo boost for longer.
As you say, the trick is not to have to stop / brake in the first place.
I "get away" with that because at the time i'm commuting theres not a massive amount of traffic therefore the few junctions i do traverse arent clogged up with other traffic.
I'm on holiday at the moment and being forced to drive a diesel Golf and I just can't get on with it.
Nothing below 2k. Then a horrible noise for the next 2k plus vibrations through the seat, wheel and pedals. Then nothing.
I'd have a petrol 4 pot all day long in something like a Golf. The extra 25% or so of fuel use would just be the "tax" I'd be willing to pay to get away from the racket and endlessly-irritating power delivery.
For an exec, however, a 6 pot diesel mated to a 7 or 8 speed auto transmission is a totally different proposition. I'd do the diesel thing in one of those.
Nothing below 2k. Then a horrible noise for the next 2k plus vibrations through the seat, wheel and pedals. Then nothing.
I'd have a petrol 4 pot all day long in something like a Golf. The extra 25% or so of fuel use would just be the "tax" I'd be willing to pay to get away from the racket and endlessly-irritating power delivery.
For an exec, however, a 6 pot diesel mated to a 7 or 8 speed auto transmission is a totally different proposition. I'd do the diesel thing in one of those.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff