Speed & motoring fun VS mpg
Discussion
I’m saddened that it should come to this. But I have to say I’m really noticing the higher fuel costs of late. So much so that my monthly fuel allowance is blown totally out of the water at present and I’m not getting to drive some of my cars as much as I’d like too.
My 4.0 litre Jeep as sat on the garden since the beginning of the month due to sub 20mpg’s being the norm for fun driving (suspect about 15’ish as a norm). I’m a petrol head through and through, but gone are the days of putting a “tenner” in the tank. The TR7 is not much better as for some reason you always seem to go everywhere at WOT. But £80 or £90 to do 200 miles or so is getting tough to justify.
So where does this leave the enthusiast????
Well I see only 2 options:
1. Different fuel(s)
2. Less weight and drivetrain losses
My Roadster has been a pleasure over the past 18 months and part of that comes from being able to drive it hard (which is fun
), yet still get well into the 40’s or even 50’s mpg. So in reality it costs me a similar amount per mile fuel wise as my TR7 V8 did in 2001.
So what other fast/fun/interesting cars are out there for the enthusiast that can still offer this level of pence per mile fuel usage? How fast can you go?
Reckon this needs 3 categories:
-sub £5k
-£5-10k
-over £10k
Only restraints are, while it doesn’t need to be quiet or comfy, it needs to be usable. So doors, small boot and a roof good enough to live outside and be usable all year round are musts really. Oh and RWD
My 4.0 litre Jeep as sat on the garden since the beginning of the month due to sub 20mpg’s being the norm for fun driving (suspect about 15’ish as a norm). I’m a petrol head through and through, but gone are the days of putting a “tenner” in the tank. The TR7 is not much better as for some reason you always seem to go everywhere at WOT. But £80 or £90 to do 200 miles or so is getting tough to justify.
So where does this leave the enthusiast????
Well I see only 2 options:
1. Different fuel(s)
2. Less weight and drivetrain losses
My Roadster has been a pleasure over the past 18 months and part of that comes from being able to drive it hard (which is fun
), yet still get well into the 40’s or even 50’s mpg. So in reality it costs me a similar amount per mile fuel wise as my TR7 V8 did in 2001.So what other fast/fun/interesting cars are out there for the enthusiast that can still offer this level of pence per mile fuel usage? How fast can you go?
Reckon this needs 3 categories:
-sub £5k
-£5-10k
-over £10k
Only restraints are, while it doesn’t need to be quiet or comfy, it needs to be usable. So doors, small boot and a roof good enough to live outside and be usable all year round are musts really. Oh and RWD
Edited by 300bhp/ton on Wednesday 18th May 10:39
Chris71 said:
Caterham or Elise ... driving at normal traffic speeds (away from the motorway) I think my Roadsport A did about 40mpg!
Ahem, okay might need a creative interpretation of the final sentence in the list for those, particularly the Caterham. So, different option ... Clio 172/182.
I'd go for Caterham too. If the doors, roof and small boot aren't acceptable, then obviously light weight is key to so many aspects of fun driving and frugal driving, so pick light cars.Ahem, okay might need a creative interpretation of the final sentence in the list for those, particularly the Caterham. So, different option ... Clio 172/182.
k out of it it was 25mpg...The only other idea that keeps occurring to me, although I'm not sure I'd want to dedicate the cost to doing it. Is modern bigger displacement diesels.
I love the RV8 in my TR. But in truth its not overly powerful and with it's current short gearing is very much an 18-20mpg car unless driven carefully.
I reckon a PSA/Jag/LR 2.7 TDV6 is no bigger and probably a similar weight (or at least close enough not too worry about it). With a remap it'd actually make more power than my RV8 does, and while it'd lose the OHV sound track, I suspect an un-corked V6 diesel probably would still make an interesting noise.
And in a car weighing around 1100kg I'd hope that 50mpg is a likely target.
Or am I just mad??
On the other hand I have spied a Reliant Kitten with a bike engine, 480kg, roof and doors. Should still be speedy and I'd hope 30's mpg?
I love the RV8 in my TR. But in truth its not overly powerful and with it's current short gearing is very much an 18-20mpg car unless driven carefully.
I reckon a PSA/Jag/LR 2.7 TDV6 is no bigger and probably a similar weight (or at least close enough not too worry about it). With a remap it'd actually make more power than my RV8 does, and while it'd lose the OHV sound track, I suspect an un-corked V6 diesel probably would still make an interesting noise.
And in a car weighing around 1100kg I'd hope that 50mpg is a likely target.
Or am I just mad??
On the other hand I have spied a Reliant Kitten with a bike engine, 480kg, roof and doors. Should still be speedy and I'd hope 30's mpg?
Any old hot hatch, MR2 or MX5 for the sub£5k category, few safety systems etc so they're light although the trade off is the engine tech is old so they're not necessarily that efficient.
Elise, VX220 for the next category, although I'd say a Caterham has adequate doors etc and the boot's fine.
Low depreciation on all these options helps keep the running costs down.
Elise, VX220 for the next category, although I'd say a Caterham has adequate doors etc and the boot's fine.
Low depreciation on all these options helps keep the running costs down.
Toyless said:
Special mention to Racing Puma too.
Any idea what they're like to run? Have to confess I don't know much about them, but they were made out to be quite extreme at the time IIRC hence I'm wondering if the costs would actually be that low?Certainly a mate had a rude awakening recently. To economise he went down to a Peugeot 306 XSi and found he now only gets mpg in the (high) 20s!
My classic car/garage/sunday toy is a Ford Capri, it has a rebuilt 2.1 with big valves and EFi, so is fairly nippy.
Partly due to the long 5th gear, small frontal area, and light weight, it does 35-37mpg whilst being battered up the motorway at a rate of leptoa likely to get me into trouble, and can do over 40 if granddadded around - although that's not what it's for, I have a diesel for bimbling.
With the price of fuel I couldn't have a guzzler anymore, have had some in the past, they were awesome cars but I'd consider one a liability now.
There are plenty of options for reasonable economy and fun. Just check in the vehicle specs that it isn't too heavy and has appropriate gearing.
If you use it on the motorways and it's revving up unecessarily then even a 1.2 will drink fuel. A 2 ton car will also need lots of fuel to haul it's fat ass up to speed - and sadly these in 4x4 mode seem to be the vehicle of choice for many now......
A car (not MPV/4x4) with a 2.0 engine will give the best compromise....
Partly due to the long 5th gear, small frontal area, and light weight, it does 35-37mpg whilst being battered up the motorway at a rate of leptoa likely to get me into trouble, and can do over 40 if granddadded around - although that's not what it's for, I have a diesel for bimbling.
With the price of fuel I couldn't have a guzzler anymore, have had some in the past, they were awesome cars but I'd consider one a liability now.
There are plenty of options for reasonable economy and fun. Just check in the vehicle specs that it isn't too heavy and has appropriate gearing.
If you use it on the motorways and it's revving up unecessarily then even a 1.2 will drink fuel. A 2 ton car will also need lots of fuel to haul it's fat ass up to speed - and sadly these in 4x4 mode seem to be the vehicle of choice for many now......
A car (not MPV/4x4) with a 2.0 engine will give the best compromise....
It also depends how you define "fun" for you. I've got two fun cars that are fun for different reasons.
The Caterham is fun because it's so direct and involving to drive, everything you do goes straight into the behaviour of the car, and everything the car does is fed straight back to you, no filtering, no interuptions, all about precision and delicacy. The low weight is key to this.
The Mustang is fun because it's a huge event to drive, it's noisy, unusual and basic, makes me, passengers, other drivers and bystanders smile, and can has the fun of far more power than grip. The nature of the V8 is key to this.
I don't think I could replicate the fun of either with a powerful, torquey diesel. However, perhaps I'd find another sort of fun from that.
The Caterham is fun because it's so direct and involving to drive, everything you do goes straight into the behaviour of the car, and everything the car does is fed straight back to you, no filtering, no interuptions, all about precision and delicacy. The low weight is key to this.
The Mustang is fun because it's a huge event to drive, it's noisy, unusual and basic, makes me, passengers, other drivers and bystanders smile, and can has the fun of far more power than grip. The nature of the V8 is key to this.
I don't think I could replicate the fun of either with a powerful, torquey diesel. However, perhaps I'd find another sort of fun from that.
Chris71 said:
Any idea what they're like to run? Have to confess I don't know much about them, but they were made out to be quite extreme at the time IIRC hence I'm wondering if the costs would actually be that low?
Certainly a mate had a rude awakening recently. To economise he went down to a Peugeot 306 XSi and found he now only gets mpg in the (high) 20s!
The Puma is nice, but I think replacement body panels are non existent. Not all that speedy, iirc they had 154hp or something from the same 1.7 motor as a normal Puma. But they also weigh 100-150kg more, so power to weight isn't hugely different. 7.9 sec 0-60mph seems to ring a bell for some reason.Certainly a mate had a rude awakening recently. To economise he went down to a Peugeot 306 XSi and found he now only gets mpg in the (high) 20s!
They has a wider track and different suspension (not sure if they had an LSD or not though). Meant to be a very good steer and lots of fun.
300bhp/ton said:
lol, but look at it this way. It's be swapping ~220-230hp for 260hp and a shed load more torque. Double the mpg too would just be a huge bonus.
Throwing Angelina Jolie out of bed for Madonna gets you stronger arms. But it's a backwards step! (Random analogy?)In context, i've just swapped and Alfa 159 2.4diesel for a 159 1.8T petrol because I'm sick of starting something that sounds like a tractor every morning. Diesel doesn't inspire, it just makes me think, "you tight fisted d1ck, you're supposed to be a petrolhead".
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff