Unexpected thirsty cars.
Discussion
For the last 3 years my wife's 1.6 petrol countryman has returned about 45mpg. In January she got her new Cooper 5dr hatch 1.5 petrol same use is doing 34.7mpg, she moaned I said don't worry after the first 1000 or so it will get better, 3500 so far and still the same. Very disappointing.
Si 330 said:
For the last 3 years my wife's 1.6 petrol countryman has returned about 45mpg. In January she got her new Cooper 5dr hatch 1.5 petrol same use is doing 34.7mpg, she moaned I said don't worry after the first 1000 or so it will get better, 3500 so far and still the same. Very disappointing.
I know it’s not popular, but doing nearly 2000 miles a month, did you consider the diesel?Si 330 said:
For the last 3 years my wife's 1.6 petrol countryman has returned about 45mpg. In January she got her new Cooper 5dr hatch 1.5 petrol same use is doing 34.7mpg, she moaned I said don't worry after the first 1000 or so it will get better, 3500 so far and still the same. Very disappointing.
Same engine as in my 1 series, really poor on fuel. My partner previously had a 2008 Corsa 1.2sxi. We had to go to a funeral in Salisbury. Not only was it uncomfortable, it was really thirsty. As mentioned, it’s not designed to sit at 80mph/4000rpm.
Another mention is my Navara D40 auto. I expected 24/25mpg, not 14/15. £300 a week in diesel currently.
Another mention is my Navara D40 auto. I expected 24/25mpg, not 14/15. £300 a week in diesel currently.
Digby said:
Smart 453 Brabus two door thing. Rarely got over 32 mpg, even creeping around. That's about the same we now get in the Cupra.
What are the Brabus like to drive? 0-60 of 6.5s unless I'm thinking of the wrong thing? I kept seeing one listed, and was in two minds to go and have a look. It looked quite nice in black and not something I've ever seen around. Twingo gt (I've owned it for years). Around town it only does around 30 mpg, dropping to mid 20's at times.
Now I'm mostly commuting on the on the motorway, but most of this is through the 50 mph roadworks on the M23. It pretty much does bang on 40 mpg sitting for miles at 50 mph (2500 rpm in 5th gear).
It was alright when I was only doing around 600 miles a month, but for the last 5 months or so I've been doing 1600 a month. (It can't quite do a week on a full tank, I fill it about every 6 days for around £50 a pop)
1149cc turbo (single cam 16v, port injected), 125bhp, 980kg kerb weight.
Now I'm mostly commuting on the on the motorway, but most of this is through the 50 mph roadworks on the M23. It pretty much does bang on 40 mpg sitting for miles at 50 mph (2500 rpm in 5th gear).
It was alright when I was only doing around 600 miles a month, but for the last 5 months or so I've been doing 1600 a month. (It can't quite do a week on a full tank, I fill it about every 6 days for around £50 a pop)
1149cc turbo (single cam 16v, port injected), 125bhp, 980kg kerb weight.
Edited by Noesph on Wednesday 26th February 20:38
stackmonkey said:
Dog Star said:
My first car was a 957cc Fiesta Pop+, X reg (ie 1981). 55bhp. Might have been 45.
Now one would think that in a light (700kg?), small car that it'd be economical.
But no! Every thing I tried to do it did 31mpg maximum - got it "tuned" (remember krypton tuning!), changed parts and filters, tried driving like a saint. 31mpg.
Strange. My first car was a 1983 Mk1 Fiesta with the same engine (only 40bhp, apparently). That averaged 38mpg over about 60,000 milesNow one would think that in a light (700kg?), small car that it'd be economical.
But no! Every thing I tried to do it did 31mpg maximum - got it "tuned" (remember krypton tuning!), changed parts and filters, tried driving like a saint. 31mpg.
Popular which was 40 bhp
Popular Plus (which had a higher compression) with 45 bhp
The Y reg BBJ231Y one I had would average around 35 mpg at A road speeds (I think I took it from 40 K miles to just under 100 K miles in three years - but if you found a road long enough to wind it up it would crack the ton on the clock - at that point the mpg was disappointing
OooohLaDeDa said:
What are the Brabus like to drive? 0-60 of 6.5s unless I'm thinking of the wrong thing? I kept seeing one listed, and was in two minds to go and have a look. It looked quite nice in black and not something I've ever seen around.
Wrong thing I think. This was the 453 ForTwo Cab. It felt faster than it was due to its size, although was still fun to throw around and the newer flappy paddle gearbox / twin-clutch was much better than the older models (could also use the stick if prefered). It was around 110 bhp iirc with a 0-60 probably more like 8 or 9. It could still hustle, though.TameRacingDriver said:
RB Will said:
Swole said:
I always figured the old R53 Mini wouldn't be so bad. Little 1.6, ok supercharged but still pretty weak. £60 to fill, so around 50L at £1.20pl, returning 280miles to a tank of mixed driving so somewhere around 25mpg. Unnecessarily expensive to run for a commuter so sold it on the next guy.
yeah town driving not their strong point. My Mrs would get 25-28mpg round town in hers. If I took it out for a countryside blast I would get about the same. We took it from Wiltshire up to Snowdon and back at a casual cruise and it averaged about 42mpg. Could easily do 30-35mpg without trying.
Noesph said:
Twingo gt (I've owned it for years). Around town it only does around 30 mpg, dropping to mid 20's at times.
Now I'm mostly commuting on the on the motorway, but most of this is through the 50 mph roadworks on the M23. It pretty much does bang on 40 mpg sitting for miles at 50 mph (2500 rpm in 5th gear).
It was alright when I was only doing around 600 miles a month, but for the last 5 months or so I've been doing 1600 a month. (It can't quite do a week on a full tank, I fill it about every 6 days for around £50 a pop)
1149cc turbo (single cam 16v, port injected), 125bhp, 980kg kerb weight.
Has the car been remapped? These had 100PS as standard.Now I'm mostly commuting on the on the motorway, but most of this is through the 50 mph roadworks on the M23. It pretty much does bang on 40 mpg sitting for miles at 50 mph (2500 rpm in 5th gear).
It was alright when I was only doing around 600 miles a month, but for the last 5 months or so I've been doing 1600 a month. (It can't quite do a week on a full tank, I fill it about every 6 days for around £50 a pop)
1149cc turbo (single cam 16v, port injected), 125bhp, 980kg kerb weight.
Edited by Noesph on Wednesday 26th February 20:38
Leins said:
I’m not sure you’ll get those sort of numbers out of a JCW. My GP normally averages low-20s
Which is what I more or less expected. Is it worth the thirst? From the videos I've been watching I'd have to say yes to that...Also bear in mind I was considering 3.0 BMW's and 350z's anyway so it's not a huge deal for me.
I concur with what people are saying about the MX5. My NB 1.8 struggled to get 30mpg. Fairly light but crap aero I suppose?
I'm starting to wonder whether there is an optimum cylinder size though, as all the 1.8s that I've owned have struggled to better 30mpg (Honda Civic, MX5, Toyota Corolla). 2 litre 4-pots have also been juicy in my experience. Had a 2004 WRX, which did low 20s and maybe 30mpg on a run but that was as expected but my mk4 Golf 2.0 GTi did about the same and only had half the power! A little ironic, as I bought it as a more "sensible", cheaper to run car to replace my Corrado VR6 and that did 30mpg without too much difficulty and even 40mpg once on a long motorway run with light traffic.
My Polo 1.4 TDI aside, which did 50mpg all day even if you thrashed it and 60mpg on the motorway (had quite a few company cars with the VW PD engines and they were all brilliant on fuel). the 1.4s that I have owned have all been surprisingly thirsty too. My mk3 Astra 1.4 (60bhp) probably averaged around 35mpg, maybe 40mpg on the motorway thanks to the very tall 5th gear (top speed in 4th not 5th) but it was very underpowered so I guess that I had to drive it fairly hard. No excuses for my current daily (Golf GT 1.4 TSI Estate). Plenty of low down torque, so I don't have to drive it too hard but I'm struggling to average more than 30mpg (it could probably do 40mpg on a run). I struggle to get 300 miles out of a tank, whereas my previous car, an R56 MINI Cooper easily did 400 miles on a tank (same size tank) and consistently averaged 40mpg+. My 205 GTi 1.6 probably did about that too despite the short gearing, so 1.6 NAs have treated me well for fuel economy. I'm particularly disappointed with the fuel economy on the Golf, as I had a 1.2 TSI as a rental a few years ago which averaged 45mpg in the 2 weeks that I drove it (better than a Focus diesel that I once rented over a similar time period in fact).
Special mention for my W202 C250TD Estate that I owned as a stopgap for 6 weeks. Not sure what mpg it did because the trip computer was broken but I only filled it up once and must have done 1000 miles+ in that time. Bigger than average tank though I think. My mum had a mk1 Ford Ka for a number of years with the old 1.3 Pushrod engine. I always found it surprisingly thirsty for a 1.3 with only 59bhp. I never checked properly but I imagine it was only in the 30mpgs.
This thread raise an interesting question. In terms of "performance" cars, what cars offer excellent fuel economy for the performance? I've heard the 35i/40i BMWs are very good in this respect. How about the 5-pot in the Audi RS3/TT RS or the blown Flat 6 engines in the latest Porsches?
I'm starting to wonder whether there is an optimum cylinder size though, as all the 1.8s that I've owned have struggled to better 30mpg (Honda Civic, MX5, Toyota Corolla). 2 litre 4-pots have also been juicy in my experience. Had a 2004 WRX, which did low 20s and maybe 30mpg on a run but that was as expected but my mk4 Golf 2.0 GTi did about the same and only had half the power! A little ironic, as I bought it as a more "sensible", cheaper to run car to replace my Corrado VR6 and that did 30mpg without too much difficulty and even 40mpg once on a long motorway run with light traffic.
My Polo 1.4 TDI aside, which did 50mpg all day even if you thrashed it and 60mpg on the motorway (had quite a few company cars with the VW PD engines and they were all brilliant on fuel). the 1.4s that I have owned have all been surprisingly thirsty too. My mk3 Astra 1.4 (60bhp) probably averaged around 35mpg, maybe 40mpg on the motorway thanks to the very tall 5th gear (top speed in 4th not 5th) but it was very underpowered so I guess that I had to drive it fairly hard. No excuses for my current daily (Golf GT 1.4 TSI Estate). Plenty of low down torque, so I don't have to drive it too hard but I'm struggling to average more than 30mpg (it could probably do 40mpg on a run). I struggle to get 300 miles out of a tank, whereas my previous car, an R56 MINI Cooper easily did 400 miles on a tank (same size tank) and consistently averaged 40mpg+. My 205 GTi 1.6 probably did about that too despite the short gearing, so 1.6 NAs have treated me well for fuel economy. I'm particularly disappointed with the fuel economy on the Golf, as I had a 1.2 TSI as a rental a few years ago which averaged 45mpg in the 2 weeks that I drove it (better than a Focus diesel that I once rented over a similar time period in fact).
Special mention for my W202 C250TD Estate that I owned as a stopgap for 6 weeks. Not sure what mpg it did because the trip computer was broken but I only filled it up once and must have done 1000 miles+ in that time. Bigger than average tank though I think. My mum had a mk1 Ford Ka for a number of years with the old 1.3 Pushrod engine. I always found it surprisingly thirsty for a 1.3 with only 59bhp. I never checked properly but I imagine it was only in the 30mpgs.
This thread raise an interesting question. In terms of "performance" cars, what cars offer excellent fuel economy for the performance? I've heard the 35i/40i BMWs are very good in this respect. How about the 5-pot in the Audi RS3/TT RS or the blown Flat 6 engines in the latest Porsches?
M1C said:
Noesph said:
Twingo gt (I've owned it for years). Around town it only does around 30 mpg, dropping to mid 20's at times.
Now I'm mostly commuting on the on the motorway, but most of this is through the 50 mph roadworks on the M23. It pretty much does bang on 40 mpg sitting for miles at 50 mph (2500 rpm in 5th gear).
It was alright when I was only doing around 600 miles a month, but for the last 5 months or so I've been doing 1600 a month. (It can't quite do a week on a full tank, I fill it about every 6 days for around £50 a pop)
1149cc turbo (single cam 16v, port injected), 125bhp, 980kg kerb weight.
Has the car been remapped? These had 100PS as standard.Now I'm mostly commuting on the on the motorway, but most of this is through the 50 mph roadworks on the M23. It pretty much does bang on 40 mpg sitting for miles at 50 mph (2500 rpm in 5th gear).
It was alright when I was only doing around 600 miles a month, but for the last 5 months or so I've been doing 1600 a month. (It can't quite do a week on a full tank, I fill it about every 6 days for around £50 a pop)
1149cc turbo (single cam 16v, port injected), 125bhp, 980kg kerb weight.
Edited by Noesph on Wednesday 26th February 20:38
Second Best said:
Yours will be a 1.6, Merc changed the engines around 2010 when they killed off the old 1.8 supercharged 4-pot (mine was a 2004) and put a 1.6 4-pot in its place. My dad has a 2010 C180 with the 1.6 and whilst it feels slower than my old C180 (they're not exactly hot rods so the difference isn't that great) the mpg seems to be a bit more consistent, returning low 30s around town and high 30s on a run.
I also have a new Merc C200 as a works car, I've got an 80 mile drive tomorrow with a mix of town and motorways so I'll make a note of the mpg figure as a comparison. No idea what size the engine is but it's a 4-pot and sounds like it has a low pressure turbo.
Today's drive was pretty much 50-50 between town driving and motorway driving. I was impressed to see the new C200 returned just over 43mpg. I also have a new Merc C200 as a works car, I've got an 80 mile drive tomorrow with a mix of town and motorways so I'll make a note of the mpg figure as a comparison. No idea what size the engine is but it's a 4-pot and sounds like it has a low pressure turbo.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff