Is there a fun, petrol car that will do a genuine 40mpg?

[TameRacingDriver]

Pit Pony said:

Mk1 Mx5 can achieve 40 mpg.

Really?! Not my experience!

[acme]

s m said:

acme said:

s m said:

Ecosseven said:

Seat Ibiza od Leon 1.4 ACT. Claimed 60MPG so I would imagine a genuine 45MPG is achievable in mixed driving. 140-150PS in a relatively light car so quick enough to be fun

The A1 has the same 150 engine as well and is a pretty good steer - enjoyed it slightly more than the Swift although it is a bit heavier - anyway, did well over a true 40 on a run through Welsh mountains ( although the computer is an optimistic liar! )

I've got that engine in a MK7 Golf with DSG (stick to manual in my opinion if low mileage) & in 11.5k miles I'm getting 42.9 logged on a spreadsheet not OBC. So nowhere near as good as advertised but as expected & in line with honest john estimate.

Quick & smooth but use the performance & it destroys economy. I drive like a granny most of the time!

Yeah, that over 40 figure was a brim to brim measurement, not the computer figure! Wasn't hanging about but I guess the A1 is a fair bit lighter than the Mk7 Golf

Interesting one that, the Golf weighs 1270kg give or take 10kg, and is another reason I got petrol as back to back with the 2.0TDI you could clearly feel the difference over the nose. I'd be intrigued to know what the A1 weighs.

[Mr Tidy]

Probably not in the real world - just be sad in an Ecobox Golf/A3/A-Class/1 Series diesel or man up and get a proper car FFS!
Life is too short............

[s m]

acme said:

Interesting one that, the Golf weighs 1270kg give or take 10kg, and is another reason I got petrol as back to back with the 2.0TDI you could clearly feel the difference over the nose. I'd be intrigued to know what the A1 weighs.

Will depend on the spec of the individual cars I guess but about 10% lighter looking at the examples Autocar has weighed

Anyway as per the OP's questions, it did meet them as I saw them :-

"So, have you driven anything that meets the following criteria?
Quick enough to be interesting (I guess over 100bhp would be a reasonable figure)
Manual gearbox
Less than 5 years old
Less than 30,000 pounds but ideally a lot less!
Preferably petrol (but maybe diesel if it`s as fun or more fun than the petrol equivalent)
A genuine real world 40mpg without trying too hard (but obviously not driving like you stole it either).
"

I don't commute in stop start London traffic though so for me 40 genuine mpg is achievable "without trying too hard"

Edited by s m on Thursday 9th April 01:11

[Mr Tidy]

TBH I think you need to make a decision.............
I had a 123d BMW which averaged 48mpg over 80,000 miles in 6+ years. It wasn't slow but wasn't exactly exciting!
Then last year I bought a Z4 Coupe which only averages about 30 mpg but is so much more exciting in every way.
You tend to get what you pay for, so 40mpg OR fun, but not both........

[Evoluzione]

GTIAlex said:

Just picked this up

Fiesta Zetec S 'Red/Black Edition'

1.0 turbo, claimed 65mpg, realistic 55mpg, 140bhp.

Only had it a few days but its a fantastic steer, engine is a little gem and a genuinely lovely place to sit.

This ^^ x 1000 (or the other Fester Zetec 1.25L turbo thing)

When you've experienced one you're left with one question; "Why would anyone buy anything else?" it's so clearly way ahead of everything in its class it's beyond belief.

[lukefreeman]

TameRacingDriver said:

lukefreeman said:

So how does a much lighter car with the same engine get substantially lower?

here

Answer: It doesn't

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/facts-and-fi...

He said 40mpg, and as rule of thumb, real life figures are worse than Parkers.........

[AndyT77]

kambites said:

Do any of you guys with Cooper Ss actually average 40mpg or is it more a question of "it should be possible but no-one would ever actually do it"? It's very impressive if it can average 40 without trying.

I had a R56 Cooper S and never got 40mpg. More like 35-36mpg.

[masermartin]

lukefreeman said:

So how does a much lighter car with the same engine get substantially lower?

here

Aerodynamics, gear ratios, state of tune, rolling resistance... any number of possible factors. Just because it's a Lotus doesn't mean it has automatically been fine tuned to be the best in every single category. Celica looks a much less fussy shape (probably for genuine reasons on the part of the Lotus), may well have better gear ratios for commuting/day-to-day driving, as opposed to hammering Norfolk's finest B roads.

[masermartin]

lukefreeman said:

He said 40mpg, and as rule of thumb, real life figures are worse than Parkers.........

But didn't you say real world experience had the Elise in the 40's?

[Goatex]

Loooooong shot....

BMW i3 REX

...and I just remembered the OP said manual (although to be fair there aren't any gears to change)

[lukefreeman]

masermartin said:

lukefreeman said:

He said 40mpg, and as rule of thumb, real life figures are worse than Parkers.........

But didn't you say real world experience had the Elise in the 40's?

I did........K series with less power too.

The 190 engines are thirsty for what they are.

[thatguy11]

lukefreeman said:

TameRacingDriver said:

lukefreeman said:

So how does a much lighter car with the same engine get substantially lower?

here

Answer: It doesn't

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/facts-and-fi...

He said 40mpg, and as rule of thumb, real life figures are worse than Parkers.........

Actually I said it gets 40mpg on the motorway sitting at 70. Parker's stated mpg figure is the combined figure, so will be a lot lower. Generally I've found Parker's combined figures to be pretty accurate; the Celica's combined mpg is probably in the low-mid 30s for most of them, but mine spends a lot of time on the motorway so my average mpg is probably skewed a little from the overall average across all Celicas.

Edited by thatguy11 on Thursday 9th April 13:02

[otolith]

lukefreeman said:

thatguy11 said:

entropy said:

If you're not overly fussed by performance I'm getting 40mpg in mixed driving in Celica 140, 44mpg on motorway and that's from sticking to NSLs.

190 Celica will get you in the high 30s.

I have a 190 and can confirm this; I get 40 from mine on the motorway just by sitting at 70. Barely drops to 35mpg while hooning

So how does a much lighter car with the same engine get substantially lower?

here

The weight doesn't make much difference to steady-state fuel consumption, so not much advantage from that in terms of motorway fuel consumption. The Lotus has a much higher coefficient of drag at 0.41 vs 0.32 (in return for which the Lotus has a little under zero lift). The Toyota has a larger frontal area, but overall the CdA of the Toyota is lower, at 0.61 vs 0.65. The semi-trackday AD08R tyres on mine won't be doing much for rolling resistance.

Where you would see the weight difference on fuel consumption come into play would be cross-country with lots of hard acceleration.

[Nige_GTI]

208 GTi?
Only done 300miles and getting 39mpg. 200BHP and I can confirm it it fun due to only being 1150kG

[lee_erm]

TameRacingDriver said:

Really?! Not my experience!

Mine has never got close to that, even on a cruise

[masermartin]

lukefreeman said:

masermartin said:

lukefreeman said:

He said 40mpg, and as rule of thumb, real life figures are worse than Parkers.........

But didn't you say real world experience had the Elise in the 40's?

I did........K series with less power too.

The 190 engines are thirsty for what they are.

So are we agreeing that bringing up the parkers figures and trying to call someone out on it for making up the numbers wasn't entirely necessary, in a thread where the OP was asking about real world examples?

[Martin_M]

Nige_GTI said:

208 GTi?
Only done 300miles and getting 39mpg. 200BHP and I can confirm it it fun due to only being 1150kG

How do you find the driving position? I love the seats and interior but as a lot of others have found, I couldn't find a seating position that allowed me to see the dials whilst having the steering wheel where I wanted it.

[Dan Friel]

Evoluzione said:

GTIAlex said:

Just picked this up

Fiesta Zetec S 'Red/Black Edition'

1.0 turbo, claimed 65mpg, realistic 55mpg, 140bhp.

Only had it a few days but its a fantastic steer, engine is a little gem and a genuinely lovely place to sit.

This ^^ x 1000 (or the other Fester Zetec 1.25L turbo thing)

When you've experienced one you're left with one question; "Why would anyone buy anything else?" it's so clearly way ahead of everything in its class it's beyond belief.

I'm absolutely loving mine, but I'm not sure you'll get 55mpg. I travelled back from Cornwall, and have done two long commutes since at an average of 48mpg (driving calmly). It's very easy to get down to the low 40s.

[Nige_GTI]

Martin_M said:

Nige_GTI said:

208 GTi?
Only done 300miles and getting 39mpg. 200BHP and I can confirm it it fun due to only being 1150kG

How do you find the driving position? I love the seats and interior but as a lot of others have found, I couldn't find a seating position that allowed me to see the dials whilst having the steering wheel where I wanted it.

I didn't have any sort of problem. I have the wheel a bit lower, but it feels natural. I'm a shade under 6 ft and my wife is 5ft 3in and neither of us have a problem. It's different, but by no means u comfortable.
It's a much better road car IMHO than the fiesta, which was too hard on the road.