PHEV cars rarely Charged and run on Petrol

[RobDickinson]

cj2013 said:

I think the 65 plate onwards are better looking, but they didn't significantly improve the hybrid aspect.

I actually prefer the pre face lift version, the new one is too in your face and full of unnecessary chrome etc.

They have just released an updated drive train version, but its a very mild change overall. 10% more battery and EV power and a 2.4L Atkins engine which should be more efficient. IMO a real opportunity missed it should have had 18kwh put in.

[cj2013]

JONSCZ said:

it's just not the 140+ mpg car that the advertising claims it to be when driving in real world conditions....

I recall that Mitsubishi were quite open about this, but it's the European benchmarks that rated it in that particular way (don't hate the player, hate the game etc.)

Lots of owners do regularly exceed 200mpg though - the problem is that too few drivers seem to understand the relationship between driving ability/style and mpg, and think that if you go on a motorway you'll automatically get the extra-urban figures.

[RobDickinson]

On the open road for long distance travel it's a near 2 ton 2.0 petrol suv.

I get around 7L/100km at 100kph (legal limit). Which is better than my previous grand vitara.

But it does seem to get poorer quickly as you push the speed up, imagine at 80-90mph on UK motorways it won't be good

[Merry]

JONSCZ said:

One with a spec that's worth having (ie not the bottom of the range) is over £40k new and I really do get 25-28 mpg average as I do a lot of driving in Central London and motorways (without "driving like a pleb or being wilfully inaccurate"....).
As I said, they make great company cars, or if you happen to do fewer than 17-18 miles before you have somewhere to charge it.
It isn't a bad car at all, it's just not the 140+ mpg car that the advertising claims it to be when driving in real world conditions....

I'm not disputing what you're saying, it's just baffling me how you're getting such a low figure both in terms of mpg and to a lesser extent ev range. I've certainly never seen ours into the 20s mpg wise. We fairly regularly get 25 miles on EV too.

Town traffic tends to see the average mpg go up with even with a flat battery, motorways do the opposite. I've seen a pretty huge difference between cruising at 70mph and er, well faster speeds too, certainly more pronounced than in other vehicles I've had.

But yeah, decent tool under the right circumstances - each to their own and all!

I wouldn't be spending £40k on a new one though. That is mad.

[Trailhead]

Interesting thread. OP is bang on the money. We are swapping a company car at the moment for a Golf GTE..... we won’t be installing a charging point and the driver has stated they don’t intend to charge, ever. It’s just has a lower BIK than a GTI or GTD.

[RobDickinson]

Merry said:

I wouldn't be spending £40k on a new one though. That is mad.

Are they really that much there?

Mitusbishi NZ just dropped the priec on the NZ ones to roughly the same as the petrol/diesel 4wd versions (within a few $k), all around $53k or so, bit more for non poverty spec.

[Jag_NE]

cj2013 said:

Jag_NE said:

Yes, crap power train aside they are still awful cars.

You seem to be quite bothered by them. I've heard nothing but glowing reports from everyone who owns one. Most dealers sell them as soon as they arrive, too.

They are awful inside and out.

[Some Guy]

Used one of these regularly as a company vehicle. Wasn't owned or leased by us, but supplied by a rental company as/when needed. We never once bothered to charge it up. Wasn't worth the time and effort to get 17 electric miles when faced with a 400 mile return drive.

Fuel millage was mid 20's, maybe 28 on a good day. Saying that, is usually carried 250 Kg of equipment in the back and was primarily driven on motorways. Indicated range was "about" 2oo miles, but in reality, I looked for fuel around the 180 miles mark as I didn't trust the gauge. Showed 320 miles when full and after 180 miles, showed 10% fuel left (although range was still showing 70 miles?).

It was a decent place to be when traveling for 2-3 days on the road and I did enjoy driving it. Its easy to live with, comfortable and has a decent level of toys.


Question time:

Why are Hybrid vehicles quoted as MPG?
Shouldn't it be MPG & KW?
If you plug it in, then its just not the liquid fuel that is relevant to the available mileage.

Its a bit like saying my loaf of bread will provide me with 58 sandwiches (providing the loaf fairy pops in each night and leaves me another 4 slices).

[cj2013]

Jag_NE said:

They are awful inside and out.

So that's a yes, they bother you then

[Leggy]

I run a C350e as a company car to get the BIK. However I cannot offset the cost of the electricity I personally pay by plugging it in at home. Which may also be a reason people don’t bother charging them.
I do though as I genuinely enjoy my commute into the office on pure electric power. Everyone knows it’s the short journeys that are most polluting.
I looked at the Outlander and was impressed by the way it drove, and we run a few at work. But the Merc had 280bhp combined.

[Jag_NE]

cj2013 said:

Jag_NE said:

They are awful inside and out.

So that's a yes, they bother you then

You seem to be getting quite excited about the thought of them “bothering me” whatever that means to you. They are absolute turds of cars, practically and environmentally.

[RobDickinson]

Meh the outlander isn't perfect but it's a better interior than most cars I've owned.

I'll have used around 150 L of fuel for the year compared to 1500 in my previous similar car.

All depends on how you use it...

[dmsims]

Jag_NE said:

They are absolute turds of cars, practically and environmentally.

You must be thinking of a diseasel Evoque

[Jag_NE]

dmsims said:

You must be thinking of a diseasel Evoque

A euro6 diesel evoque is infinitely nicer than an outlander with similar nox with about half the co2 output

[Russ T Bolt]

JONSCZ said:

Merry said:

We get between 35 and 40mpg when the battery is flat. If you're getting 25mpg your driving like a pleb or you're being willfully inaccurate.
I guess they're about £30k new? .

One with a spec that's worth having (ie not the bottom of the range) is over £40k new and I really do get 25-28 mpg average as I do a lot of driving in Central London and motorways (without "driving like a pleb or being wilfully inaccurate"....).
As I said, they make great company cars, or if you happen to do fewer than 17-18 miles before you have somewhere to charge it.
It isn't a bad car at all, it's just not the 140+ mpg car that the advertising claims it to be when driving in real world conditions....

I have one also, company leased.

I use it for local journeys of a few miles. But mostly weekly journeys to our office which is 100 miles away down the M4.

I drive it very hard and often hit the limiter, I have averaged 38mpg over the last 10,000 miles. Unless you are measuring a very specific short uneconomic journey not sure how you would get such a low average.

[Russ T Bolt]

Jag_NE said:

cj2013 said:

Jag_NE said:

Yes, crap power train aside they are still awful cars.

You seem to be quite bothered by them. I've heard nothing but glowing reports from everyone who owns one. Most dealers sell them as soon as they arrive, too.

They are awful inside and out.

I disagree, what car do you drive so that I can make a random judgement on it ?

[Russ T Bolt]

Leggy said:

I run a C350e as a company car to get the BIK. However I cannot offset the cost of the electricity I personally pay by plugging it in at home. Which may also be a reason people don’t bother charging them.
I do though as I genuinely enjoy my commute into the office on pure electric power. Everyone knows it’s the short journeys that are most polluting.
I looked at the Outlander and was impressed by the way it drove, and we run a few at work. But the Merc had 280bhp combined.

It depends, I get reimbursed HMRC mileage rates, so fully charged I get 25 miles which has cost me £1.12 but I effectively get £3.50 back and think the rates have just gone up again.

[Russ T Bolt]

Jag_NE said:

dmsims said:

You must be thinking of a diseasel Evoque

A euro6 diesel evoque is infinitely nicer than an outlander with similar nox with about half the co2 output

That's just as well, because you will spend a fair bit of time sat in it waiting for recovery if my neighbours car is typical.

[dmsims]

Jag_NE said:

A euro6 diesel evoque is infinitely nicer than an outlander with similar nox with about half the co2 output

In your fantasy world (which has moved from "practically and environmentally")

CO2
Evoque 129
Outlander PHEV 44

[Jag_NE]

Russ T Bolt said:

Jag_NE said:

cj2013 said:

Jag_NE said:

Yes, crap power train aside they are still awful cars.

You seem to be quite bothered by them. I've heard nothing but glowing reports from everyone who owns one. Most dealers sell them as soon as they arrive, too.

They are awful inside and out.

I disagree, what car do you drive so that I can make a random judgement on it ?

I have an XF.