Small engines in large cars

[IanCress]

Not engine related failures through. most of them have been due to a failed coolant pipe which has allowed the engine to overheat, and subsequently the head gasket has failed.

[carparkno1]

hora said:

I REALLY liked the 1.0T in the Fiesta that I hired for a 600mile round trip. I only got 35mpg average though.

Thats just making normal/good progress. In the spirit of Ford and their hooky/imaginary/bogus MPG figures I imagine the mondeo 1.0T will have shocking real life mpg.

And that was only in a Fiesta? Like you say in a Mondeo what would it be vs a lazy 2.0 petrol with the same bhp but no turbo. Downsizing is the trend though as it looks great on paper having an engine the size of a sheet of a4

[Mafffew]

carparkno1 said:

Wife was intrigued by the new 1.2 petrol qashqai. God only know how hard that would have to work with two adults a teenager and a dog.

Wonder what the mpg would be.

My old man is getting one as a company car in a month or so. Why, I have no idea, but it is a 1.2 turbocharged unit I believe, so it should be able to do the job.

[Pixelpeep7r]

Maybe it's a ploy by the manufacturers to bring their range average Co2 figure down?

Based on progress to date, Fiat, Suzuki, BMW, General Motors, Hyundai, Mazda and Honda would all miss the 2021 fleet average target of 95g/km.

Honda is the worst offender – based on today’s figures, the Japanese brand wouldn’t hit a 95g/km range-wide CO2 average of 95g/km until 2027 – SIX years after the deadline.

This means that Honda, along with others who miss the 2021 target, risks years of punitive financial penalties on every car sold in Europe unless it ups the pace of its CO2 reductions.

The fine is €95 per gram of CO2 the fleet average is over target, multiplied by the number of cars sold.

[carparkno1]

Mafffew said:

My old man is getting one as a company car in a month or so. Why, I have no idea, but it is a 1.2 turbocharged unit I believe, so it should be able to do the job.

Interesting. There's a 1.6 with 163bhp available as well. Given the choice I'd take that for the extra overtaking shove. I suppose if you mainly drive it around town then the 1.2 is fine but if you're on the motorway a lot would you want the extra power?

[Dog Star]

If you're just an "A to B" motorist who spends most of their time in a big city then I guess these kind of cars make good sense; you're stuck in traffic a lot, the performance is adequate and you still have a bigger, comfy car. I can entirely see their point.

[funkyrobot]

Pixelpeep7r said:

Maybe it's a ploy by the manufacturers to bring their range average Co2 figure down?

Based on progress to date, Fiat, Suzuki, BMW, General Motors, Hyundai, Mazda and Honda would all miss the 2021 fleet average target of 95g/km.

Honda is the worst offender – based on today’s figures, the Japanese brand wouldn’t hit a 95g/km range-wide CO2 average of 95g/km until 2027 – SIX years after the deadline.

This means that Honda, along with others who miss the 2021 target, risks years of punitive financial penalties on every car sold in Europe unless it ups the pace of its CO2 reductions.

The fine is €95 per gram of CO2 the fleet average is over target, multiplied by the number of cars sold.

It's a shame that the craziness around emissions decides the future of engines.

[budgie smuggler]

It's right that emissions are a strong consideration IMVHO, problem is that the tests are so wholly unrealistic that these small engines almost seem to 'game' them while delivering mediocre real world results.

[poing]

hora said:

I REALLY liked the 1.0T in the Fiesta that I hired for a 600mile round trip. I only got 35mpg average though.

Thats just making normal/good progress. In the spirit of Ford and their hooky/imaginary/bogus MPG figures I imagine the mondeo 1.0T will have shocking real life mpg.

I get 45mpg (in fact mostly 47) from my 1.0 Fiesta, mine is the 125bhp version but I'm not a gentle driver. Someone above got over 50mpg from the one they drove. I'm guessing you drove it like a hire car

I'm not bothered about small capacity engines when they have a turbo on them, that's been going on for decades without big problems - Daihatsu Charade Turbo springs to mind.

A N/A 1.0 or 1.2 with 60bhp in a Polo, given the size of modern Polo's, is something I wouldn't consider though. There does seem to be a trend of all-or-nothing with manufacturers, you either get a slow one or a fast one with very little in the middle. I guess it depends if you are mainly a town based driver where it doesn't really matter and sitting in traffic on the commute the engine size is irrelevant. It does increase the problem with people that can't overtake though because they don't have the skill to use a slower car effectively.

[cptsideways]

If the UK/Europe changed its taxation class to fuel used at the pump then all this downsizing would probably not be happening.

You only need to look at Fuelly to see what people get in real driving. The "book" figures are so way off reality its becoming a joke & any manufacturer or dealer promoting the highest number of "up to 84mpg" plastered over the car should be shot.

In reality pick the lowest number quoted & that is what you will get in real terms.

Fiesta Ecoboost 1.0L, about 36mpg in reality quoted at 64mpg
http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/fiesta/2014?enginec...

[DJP]

Pixelpeep7r said:

Maybe it's a ploy by the manufacturers to bring their range average Co2 figure down?

This^^.

budgie smuggler said:

It's right that emissions are a strong consideration IMVHO, problem is that the tests are so wholly unrealistic that these small engines almost seem to 'game' them while delivering mediocre real world results.

And this^^.

Three years ago a did an 800 mile round trip in Southern Spain in an almost new Polo 1.2. It averaged 33mpg over the whole trip.

The following year, I did the same trip in my own car – a Volvo V70 2.5 auto (petrol). It averaged 34mpg on the same journey.

On paper, the Polo should slaughter the bigger car on fuel economy but in the real world, not so much.

[crofty1984]

DavidJG said:

I can't help but wonder what the life expectancy of these engines will be. Logically, a 1.2 pulling a car that size is going to be working very hard all the time. Same with the 1.0 ecoboost Mondeo. New engine every 50,000 miles??

Standard engine test programmes are 250/500/750/1000 hours. Varies between continuous on the limiter running, simulated stop-start traffic, skipped services, running programs designed to be particularly harsh, variable loads etc. Plus hours upon hours of real-world driving.

Your 1.0l turbocharged engine has passed exactly the same tests as your 1.6 NA one from 5 years back.

[J4CKO]

Will be interesting to see the long term reliability of a 1.0 Ecoboost lugging a Mondeo, I personally think it will be fine, far more knowledgeable people than me at Ford have engineered and thoroughly tested it, they don't every one of them back with mangled internals, I suspect to drive it will be acceptable to most drivers who arent petrolheads, it will do 90 on the motorway, keep up with traffic no problem, it just wont be fast, I think normal folk dont go everywhere trying to get that acceleration fix from a Mondeo, they just get annoyed when the thing barely moves, i think it will have enough get up and go to not annoy but no more than that.

I drove a Focus with that engine in, I thought it pulled quite well, adequate plus a bit in reserve.

[Mave]

funkyrobot said:

Isn't that related to the split coolant pipe issue though?

But has the coolant pipe split because the engine is running harder all the time?

[shakotan]

The Insignia is available in 3 engine options, a 2.8 V6 petrol, a 2.0 diesel unit, and a 1.4 petrol.

I rented an Insignia estate in Amsterdam once, to visit a company in the Netherlands which was on the German border, so quite a decent proportion of the journey was on the Autobahn.

"You'll like this car", said the jolly Dutch guy as he handed me the keys "It's turbocharged!".

So I looked forward to giving it a v-max blast on the Autobahn, only to find the bloody thing wouldn't go over 114mph!

Its only when I got home and researched it, I found out it had a 1.4 petrol engine!

[funkyrobot]

Mave said:

funkyrobot said:

Isn't that related to the split coolant pipe issue though?

But has the coolant pipe split because the engine is running harder all the time?

I think it was the material the pipe was made from. There has been a thread on here about it:

http://www.pistonheads.com/GASSING/topic.asp?h=0&a...

[poing]

Mave said:

funkyrobot said:

Isn't that related to the split coolant pipe issue though?

But has the coolant pipe split because the engine is running harder all the time?

No it was made of rigid plastic instead of flexible rubber so it cracked, they have now changed this.

[northwest monkey]

Pixelpeep7r said:

The fine is €95 per gram of CO2 the fleet average is over target, multiplied by the number of cars sold.

So presumably the likes of RR, Bentley, Aston Martin etc. wont care less because they sell very few cars compared to the likes of Honda / Ford etc?

[Pixelpeep7r]

northwest monkey said:

Pixelpeep7r said:

The fine is €95 per gram of CO2 the fleet average is over target, multiplied by the number of cars sold.

So presumably the likes of RR, Bentley, Aston Martin etc. wont care less because they sell very few cars compared to the likes of Honda / Ford etc?

well Aston Martin tried to do something about it didn't they... with this

[minky monkey]

I'm just in the process to testdriving new cars to find something to replace my Swift Sport. I need something a bit more grown up and comfortable - bad back etc..

Yesterday I drove a Ceed 1.6 diesel. Brand new car, allegedly something like 130bhp. Total garbage. I liked the car, but the power delivery was non existent. Worse than the diesel I use at work.

This afternoon, I have a drive booked in the 1.0 ecoboost 100ps fiesta and the brand new Mazda 2 which has just arrived in the showroom. I was looking at the Zetec S, but think I'm still going back to my boy racer roots..