BlueMotions and other small capacity Petrols - a rip off?
Discussion
I'm a jekyll and hyde when it comes to cars. I loved extracting the maximum from my Lotus and enjoy racing and track days. But on a commuter car I want something peppy but very frugal for a tedious 60 mile A road dual carriageway journey every day.
Recently I've rented a Polo 1.2 TSI Bluemotion and its sister car a Seat Ibiza 1.2 Ecomotive. P'headers may switch off at the mention of these cars, but I was genuinely interested in them as a fugal, but enjoyable second car, without the rattle (and increased complexity) of a modern diesel.
In both cars, over 150 miles I averaged 33mpg. I was horrified! If I'd driven my Cayman at that speed I'd have done 32mpg, and my hefty old 530d Auto (39mpg) and 159 1.9JTDM (49mpg) would have eclipsed these superminis. I was genuinely expecting 50+mpg
Are these little petrol engines a rip off to get around EU rules, in that they get low Co2 figures when the turbo isn't spooled up but the economy goes to pot in normal driving? I worry when I see bigger cars such as Yetis, Superbs, Passats and Tiguans being fitted with these engines to flog more cars to people who think they are doing the right thing, only to find that they are less frugal than an old school 1.8 engine in these cars. When I read tests of cars such as the Yeti 1.2TSI in magazines, I read of similar shocking fuel consumption figures.
I was disappointed, because I thought a little, frugal but fun turbo could be the eco-pistonheader's nirvana....but I don't think I'm the only one to be disappointed judging by the tests.
(For clarity, I'm talking about TSIs - I've had some astonishingly good MPG figures from Diesel Blumemotions)
Recently I've rented a Polo 1.2 TSI Bluemotion and its sister car a Seat Ibiza 1.2 Ecomotive. P'headers may switch off at the mention of these cars, but I was genuinely interested in them as a fugal, but enjoyable second car, without the rattle (and increased complexity) of a modern diesel.
In both cars, over 150 miles I averaged 33mpg. I was horrified! If I'd driven my Cayman at that speed I'd have done 32mpg, and my hefty old 530d Auto (39mpg) and 159 1.9JTDM (49mpg) would have eclipsed these superminis. I was genuinely expecting 50+mpg
Are these little petrol engines a rip off to get around EU rules, in that they get low Co2 figures when the turbo isn't spooled up but the economy goes to pot in normal driving? I worry when I see bigger cars such as Yetis, Superbs, Passats and Tiguans being fitted with these engines to flog more cars to people who think they are doing the right thing, only to find that they are less frugal than an old school 1.8 engine in these cars. When I read tests of cars such as the Yeti 1.2TSI in magazines, I read of similar shocking fuel consumption figures.
I was disappointed, because I thought a little, frugal but fun turbo could be the eco-pistonheader's nirvana....but I don't think I'm the only one to be disappointed judging by the tests.
(For clarity, I'm talking about TSIs - I've had some astonishingly good MPG figures from Diesel Blumemotions)
I've bought a 1.0 Seat Arosa for commuting. Thought it would be the cheapest way to get to work and back. Currently have 1/4 of a tank left and i've only done 140 miles.
It seems to be struggling to do 30mpg. I guess the reason is that because it's so lacking in power, I end up driving with my foot on the floor everywhere. Next time I fill it up i'll try driving more slowly and see if the mpg improves.
I don't know if the same reason can be applied to the 1.2TSi cars, as they're a fair bit more powerful than my 1.0 Arosa.
It seems to be struggling to do 30mpg. I guess the reason is that because it's so lacking in power, I end up driving with my foot on the floor everywhere. Next time I fill it up i'll try driving more slowly and see if the mpg improves.
I don't know if the same reason can be applied to the 1.2TSi cars, as they're a fair bit more powerful than my 1.0 Arosa.
Edited by mnkiboy on Thursday 20th January 08:20
Interesting, a few years ago I bought my wife a new W Reg Suzuki Swift 1 litre 3 cyl. I commuted with it for a few days around the M25 & despite more than keeping up with traffic it did 46MPG! One the Swift is very light, is it the weight of these "economy" VAG cars that screws the MPG?
tr7v8 said:
Interesting, a few years ago I bought my wife a new W Reg Suzuki Swift 1 litre 3 cyl. I commuted with it for a few days around the M25 & despite more than keeping up with traffic it did 46MPG! One the Swift is very light, is it the weight of these "economy" VAG cars that screws the MPG?
Think my Arosa is only around 850kg (until i get in). It does have a temperature gauge with a mind if its own. I've seen it swing from 90c to 50c and back in about 5 seconds, so it may be running on cold settings and over-fuelling some of the time.Redlake27 said:
Recently I've rented a Polo 1.2 TSI Bluemotion and its sister car a Seat Ibiza 1.2 Ecomotive. P'headers may switch off at the mention of these cars, but I was genuinely interested in them as a fugal, but enjoyable second car, without the rattle (and increased complexity) of a modern diesel.
In both cars, over 150 miles I averaged 33mpg. I was horrified! If I'd driven my Cayman at that speed I'd have done 32mpg, and my hefty old 530d Auto (39mpg) and 159 1.9JTDM (49mpg) would have eclipsed these superminis. I was genuinely expecting 50+mpg
I haven't driven a Bluemotion, but I have driven a 1.2TSI Polo hire car. I got about 50mpg from it without trying. I'd say there's something very wrong with your driving style for small engined cars. In both cars, over 150 miles I averaged 33mpg. I was horrified! If I'd driven my Cayman at that speed I'd have done 32mpg, and my hefty old 530d Auto (39mpg) and 159 1.9JTDM (49mpg) would have eclipsed these superminis. I was genuinely expecting 50+mpg
Even in the wife's nine year old Punto, I average around 45mpg in typical driving and could get 50 if I tried.
ETA: Did you experiment with using different gears? In my experience, you need to rev little petrol engines surprisingly high to extract maximum fuel economy from them.
Edited by kambites on Thursday 20th January 08:37
Deerfoot said:
edo said:
Almost as s
te as the Honda hybrid coupe thing which Autocar are only getting 39mpg out of!
When Autocar tested the Fiat 500 TwinAir they used the expression `Now it`s fun to be frugal`.te as the Honda hybrid coupe thing which Autocar are only getting 39mpg out of!It averaged 35.7 mpg on the test.
Not great is it?
Shocking..
I have bought a 2002 Ka to get me through January and I have driven it as I normally drive, also some driving in the snow.
40mpg from an Antique OHV engine..
I am sure a normal driver would be getting over 45mpg easy.
They do a none TSI engine in the VAGS that claim slightly less mpg than the TSI's, wonder if they are better overall????
I have bought a 2002 Ka to get me through January and I have driven it as I normally drive, also some driving in the snow.
40mpg from an Antique OHV engine..
I am sure a normal driver would be getting over 45mpg easy.
They do a none TSI engine in the VAGS that claim slightly less mpg than the TSI's, wonder if they are better overall????
Redlake27 said:
I'm a jekyll and hyde when it comes to cars. I loved extracting the maximum from my Lotus and enjoy racing and track days. But on a commuter car I want something peppy but very frugal for a tedious 60 mile A road dual carriageway journey every day.
Recently I've rented a Polo 1.2 TSI Bluemotion and its sister car a Seat Ibiza 1.2 Ecomotive. P'headers may switch off at the mention of these cars, but I was genuinely interested in them as a fugal, but enjoyable second car, without the rattle (and increased complexity) of a modern diesel.
In both cars, over 150 miles I averaged 33mpg. I was horrified! If I'd driven my Cayman at that speed I'd have done 32mpg, and my hefty old 530d Auto (39mpg) and 159 1.9JTDM (49mpg) would have eclipsed these superminis. I was genuinely expecting 50+mpg
Are these little petrol engines a rip off to get around EU rules, in that they get low Co2 figures when the turbo isn't spooled up but the economy goes to pot in normal driving? I worry when I see bigger cars such as Yetis, Superbs, Passats and Tiguans being fitted with these engines to flog more cars to people who think they are doing the right thing, only to find that they are less frugal than an old school 1.8 engine in these cars. When I read tests of cars such as the Yeti 1.2TSI in magazines, I read of similar shocking fuel consumption figures.
I was disappointed, because I thought a little, frugal but fun turbo could be the eco-pistonheader's nirvana....but I don't think I'm the only one to be disappointed judging by the tests.
(For clarity, I'm talking about TSIs - I've had some astonishingly good MPG figures from Diesel Blumemotions)
I think the petrol bluemotions come only with things like stop start and part time alternators. There is probably no chance you would ever get to benefit from those facilities on the run you did.Recently I've rented a Polo 1.2 TSI Bluemotion and its sister car a Seat Ibiza 1.2 Ecomotive. P'headers may switch off at the mention of these cars, but I was genuinely interested in them as a fugal, but enjoyable second car, without the rattle (and increased complexity) of a modern diesel.
In both cars, over 150 miles I averaged 33mpg. I was horrified! If I'd driven my Cayman at that speed I'd have done 32mpg, and my hefty old 530d Auto (39mpg) and 159 1.9JTDM (49mpg) would have eclipsed these superminis. I was genuinely expecting 50+mpg
Are these little petrol engines a rip off to get around EU rules, in that they get low Co2 figures when the turbo isn't spooled up but the economy goes to pot in normal driving? I worry when I see bigger cars such as Yetis, Superbs, Passats and Tiguans being fitted with these engines to flog more cars to people who think they are doing the right thing, only to find that they are less frugal than an old school 1.8 engine in these cars. When I read tests of cars such as the Yeti 1.2TSI in magazines, I read of similar shocking fuel consumption figures.
I was disappointed, because I thought a little, frugal but fun turbo could be the eco-pistonheader's nirvana....but I don't think I'm the only one to be disappointed judging by the tests.
(For clarity, I'm talking about TSIs - I've had some astonishingly good MPG figures from Diesel Blumemotions)
I had a new 1.25 Fiesta Zetec in 2007 and it averaged.... 27mpg. Too small an engine that had to be worked too hard too much of the time to make any progress.
No doubt some granny pottering about at 25mph was getting 50mph though.
Also i think now ALL VW's will use bluemotion technology, therefore its not a rip off as technically the technology comes 'free'.
Edited by daemon on Thursday 20th January 09:13
Redlake27 said:
Are these little petrol engines a rip off to get around EU rules, in that they get low Co2 figures when the turbo isn't spooled up but the economy goes to pot in normal driving?
Pretty much so. Not just downsized petrol engines, but hybrids, small (N/A) engined stuff, anything with very low CO2 ratings is likely to be specifically optimised for the EU driving cycle to the n-th degree - which would only be representative of very gentle town and rural driving in an alternate universe where taking 3 minutes to accelerate to the NSL wouldn't result in a three mile tailback of irate fellow road users who just want to get on with their lives...Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff