MPG Then & now
Discussion
Back in 1980 Daihatsu gave us the diesel Charade 1.0L three pot, it returned 80 MPG @ a steady 56 MPH. the best economy car of it's time.
The best of todays cars can only. manage about 88MPG on the Extra urban cycle, not a great improvement over 34 years. All the other stuff, performance, refinement, comfort and safety have moved on in leaps and bounds.
Why not our miles per gallon ??? The simple answer would be blame the oil industry, it's got to be more than that.
The best of todays cars can only. manage about 88MPG on the Extra urban cycle, not a great improvement over 34 years. All the other stuff, performance, refinement, comfort and safety have moved on in leaps and bounds.
Why not our miles per gallon ??? The simple answer would be blame the oil industry, it's got to be more than that.
Seriously? Yet another thread concerned with official mpg statistics? For starters that official figure of 80mpg at a constant 56mph (which I will take at face value) is a very different proposal to an extra urban figure as calculated today (and that is a highly contentious test in itself). I'd expect some cars to produce some impressive stats for laboratory conducted constant 56mph fuel consumption levels. Secondly, a comparable car is so much heavier and offers so much more refinement, luxury, and so on.
ian2144 said:
Back in 1980 Daihatsu gave us the diesel Charade 1.0L three pot, ........ 34 years.
34 years?!! 
How the hell did that happen? 
Couple of points - compare the performance, refinement and weight of a newer uber-economical car. All much higher.
I also remember very well my first car - X reg Fiesta Pop+. 957cc. 45 BHP. No matter what I did with that car, how carefully I drove etc it would not ever give me more than 31mpg. Compare that with a new one.
I can almost crack 30mpg in a 997 Turbo S MPG, i can get 35mpg in a new Boxster S PDF. Wonder how a 6cyl did in the '80s?
With the right tech - clever gearbox, stop/start and coasting, you have a fair chance of offsetting the weight increase. In comparison, i've had a series of Smart cars which were of course light, had a 3cyl engine but the gearbox and lack of attention to detail when it came to efficiency meant 45mpg was the norm - disappointing.
It's all very well bemoaning the weight of car these days, but i'd rather my partner and kids were in a modern supermini rather than an '80s one.
The fact that VW have taken 100kg off the new Golf shows that manufacturers have been lazy in recent years. It's taken legislation to force innovation; governments just need to keep the pressure on.
With the right tech - clever gearbox, stop/start and coasting, you have a fair chance of offsetting the weight increase. In comparison, i've had a series of Smart cars which were of course light, had a 3cyl engine but the gearbox and lack of attention to detail when it came to efficiency meant 45mpg was the norm - disappointing.
It's all very well bemoaning the weight of car these days, but i'd rather my partner and kids were in a modern supermini rather than an '80s one.
The fact that VW have taken 100kg off the new Golf shows that manufacturers have been lazy in recent years. It's taken legislation to force innovation; governments just need to keep the pressure on.
Dog Star said:
34 years?!! How the hell did that happen?
Couple of points - compare the performance, refinement and weight of a newer uber-economical car. All much higher.
I also remember very well my first car - X reg Fiesta Pop+. 957cc. 45 BHP. No matter what I did with that car, how carefully I drove etc it would not ever give me more than 31mpg. Compare that with a new one.
The fact is people have expected more of cars; you can't blame manufacturers for building what they want. Refinement is a good point; how is a Charade on the motorway compared to a new Clio? It's really difficult to get a properly bare bones car these days. All i can think of is something like a Citroen C1, of which my mate had a diesel one that returned a genuine 100mpg (driving like miss daisy) and was still comfortable on a long journey. How the hell did that happen? Couple of points - compare the performance, refinement and weight of a newer uber-economical car. All much higher.
I also remember very well my first car - X reg Fiesta Pop+. 957cc. 45 BHP. No matter what I did with that car, how carefully I drove etc it would not ever give me more than 31mpg. Compare that with a new one.
hondansx said:
The fact is people have expected more of cars; you can't blame manufacturers for building what they want. Refinement is a good point; how is a Charade on the motorway compared to a new Clio? It's really difficult to get a properly bare bones car these days. All i can think of is something like a Citroen C1, of which my mate had a diesel one that returned a genuine 100mpg (driving like miss daisy) and was still comfortable on a long journey.
One thing a C1 is not, is comfortable on a long journey.Since the EU started getting serious with the CO2 levels there has been a huge economy drive. How can you not notice how much more economical virtually all new cars are now?
That Diahatsu would have never seen that figure, and also as above weighed half as much, had no spec, and little crash protection.
That Diahatsu would have never seen that figure, and also as above weighed half as much, had no spec, and little crash protection.
ian2144 said:
Back in 1980 Daihatsu gave us the diesel Charade 1.0L three pot, it returned 80 MPG @ a steady 56 MPH. the best economy car of it's time.
The best of todays cars can only. manage about 88MPG on the Extra urban cycle, not a great improvement over 34 years. All the other stuff, performance, refinement, comfort and safety have moved on in leaps and bounds.
Why not our miles per gallon ??? The simple answer would be blame the oil industry, it's got to be more than that.
Two reasons I think: The best of todays cars can only. manage about 88MPG on the Extra urban cycle, not a great improvement over 34 years. All the other stuff, performance, refinement, comfort and safety have moved on in leaps and bounds.
Why not our miles per gallon ??? The simple answer would be blame the oil industry, it's got to be more than that.
1) economy and the other things you mention are, to an extent, direct trade-offs against each other, and people value the other things more.
2) There are limited ways to improve constant-speed economy. Small turbocharged internal combustion running at that sort of load have been approaching peak theoretical efficiency (around 40%) for years, so there are minimal gains to be made in the engine; the other place one can make gains is in aerodynamics but whilst you can make small aerodynamic gains from small changes, the only way to make big changes tends to be to make cars longer or to decrease their frontal area, neither of which are desirable for "economy cars".
MPG is better now, it just is. my old 1982 E21 with a 1.8 litre engine returned no better economy on the motorway than my 2000 E38 which had a 2.8 litre engine. The E21 was probably a bit better around town but certainly not motorway. A current 318i or 320i or whatever it'd be would be much more economical, powerful, faster and more refined.
ian2144 said:
Yes cars have put on weight over the years, but not twice as much.............. the Charade was around 800Kg the new VW Up 930Kg
Economy in cars has improved at an astonishing rate. The Daihatsu, if it returned 80 was extreme. The average of comparable cars would be at least 50% better if not more. Just checked my car, 250 SLK and its recorded 52.3 mpg over the last 7500 miles, that's a diesel over mixed motoring. A comparable car 34 years ago, would be what, a TR7. 2 litre petrol, would struggle to hit 28mpg, and the performance wouldn't come close. ian2144 said:
Why not our miles per gallon ??? The simple answer would be blame the oil industry, it's got to be more than that.
That isn't the simple answer, that's the irrational paranoid answer.The oil industry makes profit by charging what they like for the product. They don't really care what MPG you do.
If I were an evil genius in charge of a finite resource I'd be limiting supply to drive up prices, rather than somehow increasing use for some reason I can't think of.
Has anyone mentioned the 100mpg Citroen AX D? Makes the Charade look like a barge.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff