Isn't mpg an odd thing and amazing how different it can be
Discussion
Having now had my Impreza Turbo for a few months I've been able to see what it's like on fuel vs performance.
First off I'm very pleased and loving the car and the noise it makes. So I have no complaints, this is just obersavational.
Impreza Turbo 2000 1999MY with aftermarket exhaust. It's doing about 23.5mpg on superunleaded (Tesco 99 or Shell vPower) with a claimed 215PS from Subaru when new.
For the same use, driving style and journeys my 5.7 litre 1999MY Camaro on regular 95RON (aftermarket exhaust and a few bolt on mods) usually does 24mpg despite being heavier, automatic and according to the dyno making nearly 360bhp.
Would I swap either? Nah!
And both are a lot better on fuel than my lifted Jeep Cherokee 4.0 that the Subaru replaced. But it does go to prove a point that smaller engines & lighter cars don't make for better fuel economy as a clean cut proven fact. Not too mention super unleaded is more expensive than regular 95RON, so the Impreza is actually quite a bit more costly pence per mile wise to run.
First off I'm very pleased and loving the car and the noise it makes. So I have no complaints, this is just obersavational.
Impreza Turbo 2000 1999MY with aftermarket exhaust. It's doing about 23.5mpg on superunleaded (Tesco 99 or Shell vPower) with a claimed 215PS from Subaru when new.
For the same use, driving style and journeys my 5.7 litre 1999MY Camaro on regular 95RON (aftermarket exhaust and a few bolt on mods) usually does 24mpg despite being heavier, automatic and according to the dyno making nearly 360bhp.
Would I swap either? Nah!
And both are a lot better on fuel than my lifted Jeep Cherokee 4.0 that the Subaru replaced. But it does go to prove a point that smaller engines & lighter cars don't make for better fuel economy as a clean cut proven fact. Not too mention super unleaded is more expensive than regular 95RON, so the Impreza is actually quite a bit more costly pence per mile wise to run.It depends on the state of tune on the engine amongst other things.
The boxer engine is highly strung compared with the big lazy V8 at approx 100hp per litre compared with 63hp per litre, using more fuel because it's more effort.
My dad was talking to someone with a tuned Impreza STI and he was getting about 12mpg
The boxer engine is highly strung compared with the big lazy V8 at approx 100hp per litre compared with 63hp per litre, using more fuel because it's more effort.
My dad was talking to someone with a tuned Impreza STI and he was getting about 12mpg
Thats good mpg from a camaro but the scooby doesnt surprise me, they have always been pretty bad on fuel, probably as previous poster said, highly strung.
I dont do many miles now so fuel isn't an issue but even at 600 miles a month an extra £60 in fuel to power a v8 compared to a typical decent-ish diesel is well worth it! It's chump change.
I dont do many miles now so fuel isn't an issue but even at 600 miles a month an extra £60 in fuel to power a v8 compared to a typical decent-ish diesel is well worth it! It's chump change.
doogz said:
That's a pretty poor figure from the Impreza, if it's a standard 215bhp model.
What sort of mpg do you think it should be doing? Parkers list it at 28mpg. On a longer run I'm sure it's doing 28-30mpg if I drive steady. But locally it's more shorter journeys and lots of revs and WOT once warmed up.doogz said:
My 265bhp one would do 28mpg average, although that was mostly longer runs. I wasn't sure what sort of driving you were doing, but based on your V8 MPG figure, guessed it wasn't exactly city driving
Not city no. Mostly country lanes and some open by-passes with a bit of town driving now and again. A lot of the driving is for fun though, so full on acceleration and throwing it about. Both cars driven the same on the same roads though.Hugo a Gogo said:
presumably you're not driving either of them constantly at whatever revs give peak power
peak power won't tell you much about peak or average economy
Seing as neither have a CVT no not driving at constant revs peak power won't tell you much about peak or average economy
In both cars revs vary from idle to red line in lots of gears
300bhp/ton said:
doogz said:
That's a pretty poor figure from the Impreza, if it's a standard 215bhp model.
What sort of mpg do you think it should be doing? Parkers list it at 28mpg. On a longer run I'm sure it's doing 28-30mpg if I drive steady. But locally it's more shorter journeys and lots of revs and WOT once warmed up.
) then mid-20s is about right. Long runs in a standard classic should see 30-32 assuming it's in good condition and you're doing a steady 70 with it dropping to more like 28-30 at 80. They also seem to utterly drink fuel while warming up the engine so very short runs (<5 miles) are rather noticeably heavier on the consumption IME.Had similar experiences with my HSV GTS UK and MY00 Imprezas. The real world mpg wiki seems to suggest that anything Petrol with 200bhp+ struggles to get over 30mpg apart for a few very recent cars i.e. M135i so not sure why the Imprezas get picked on as virtually all hot hatches aren't significantly better.
t slow and hellishly noisy with a 4 speed auto. The 745 is the most comfortable car i have owned, plenty quick enough and at 120kph is doing a touch over 2000rpm.My TVR Griff 500 would do almost 27 mpg on a long, steady M'way run at 75ish (Cumbria/South Coast).
But the E90 M3 struggled to do 23mpg on the exact same journey - understand why, but it still seems ridiculous that such a modern and brilliant engine is so fuel in-efficient when being driven so gently.
But the E90 M3 struggled to do 23mpg on the exact same journey - understand why, but it still seems ridiculous that such a modern and brilliant engine is so fuel in-efficient when being driven so gently.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff