Small thirsty cars - just what is the point of them?
Discussion
Looking for a daily snotter at the moment, something to leave at the train station car park for several days a week and still provide some fun on the drive home. And all for not much money given that it will be parked up in a high crime area. ( Why are the areas around train stations so invariably grim?)
Anyway, I have been looking at BMW's, Mercs, jags etc, probably a good few years old and with big unfashionable petrol engines. These things depreciate like a falling rock and you can get a lot of car for the money.
Mrs TS would rather I got a "nice Golf" or something. I can't tolerate the prospect of DPF nonsense and I won't do a big mileage, so petrol it has to be.
The thing is, I am finding it hard to justify or explain why cars like Golf GTI's, Renault Megane Sports, S3 Audi's etc, are so thirsty. How can it be that the damn things only do around 30mpg??
Given that you can get 25mpg out of a lazy V8, I fail to understand why on earth people would buy these thirsty hot hatches. If a hot hatchback is not good on fuel, then what is the point of it?
Am I missing something here? Do owners of hot hatches really get such poor MPG as my research suggests?
TS
Anyway, I have been looking at BMW's, Mercs, jags etc, probably a good few years old and with big unfashionable petrol engines. These things depreciate like a falling rock and you can get a lot of car for the money.
Mrs TS would rather I got a "nice Golf" or something. I can't tolerate the prospect of DPF nonsense and I won't do a big mileage, so petrol it has to be.
The thing is, I am finding it hard to justify or explain why cars like Golf GTI's, Renault Megane Sports, S3 Audi's etc, are so thirsty. How can it be that the damn things only do around 30mpg??
Given that you can get 25mpg out of a lazy V8, I fail to understand why on earth people would buy these thirsty hot hatches. If a hot hatchback is not good on fuel, then what is the point of it?
Am I missing something here? Do owners of hot hatches really get such poor MPG as my research suggests?
TS
Can you really get only 5 mpg less from a big lazy V8, in a heavier car compared to a 2.0 turbo hatch? I find that hard to believe. Sure on a motorway run, with the V8 barely ticking over it would be more efficient. But on a blast through some twisty rural roads or stop start urban commuting? I highly doubt it.
toppstuff said:
Looking for a daily snotter at the moment, something to leave at the train station car park for several days a week and still provide some fun on the drive home. And all for not much money given that it will be parked up in a high crime area. ( Why are the areas around train stations so invariably grim?)
Anyway, I have been looking at BMW's, Mercs, jags etc, probably a good few years old and with big unfashionable petrol engines. These things depreciate like a falling rock and you can get a lot of car for the money.
Mrs TS would rather I got a "nice Golf" or something. I can't tolerate the prospect of DPF nonsense and I won't do a big mileage, so petrol it has to be.
The thing is, I am finding it hard to justify or explain why cars like Golf GTI's, Renault Megane Sports, S3 Audi's etc, are so thirsty. How can it be that the damn things only do around 30mpg??
Given that you can get 25mpg out of a lazy V8, I fail to understand why on earth people would buy these thirsty hot hatches. If a hot hatchback is not good on fuel, then what is the point of it?
Am I missing something here? Do owners of hot hatches really get such poor MPG as my research suggests?
TS
I would have thought high output/revving and forced induction 4 cyl engines are always going to be compromised MPG wise.Anyway, I have been looking at BMW's, Mercs, jags etc, probably a good few years old and with big unfashionable petrol engines. These things depreciate like a falling rock and you can get a lot of car for the money.
Mrs TS would rather I got a "nice Golf" or something. I can't tolerate the prospect of DPF nonsense and I won't do a big mileage, so petrol it has to be.
The thing is, I am finding it hard to justify or explain why cars like Golf GTI's, Renault Megane Sports, S3 Audi's etc, are so thirsty. How can it be that the damn things only do around 30mpg??
Given that you can get 25mpg out of a lazy V8, I fail to understand why on earth people would buy these thirsty hot hatches. If a hot hatchback is not good on fuel, then what is the point of it?
Am I missing something here? Do owners of hot hatches really get such poor MPG as my research suggests?
TS
People buy them because they like the zingy engines, small size and handling traits of a hot hatch as against a bigger, lazier RWD car.
Horses for courses.
toppstuff said:
Am I missing something here? Do owners of hot hatches really get such poor MPG as my research suggests?
TS
Hot hatch owners are realistic. Barge owners are optimistic.TS
Shorter gearing in hot hatches compared to barge saloons also plays a part.
Out of the hatches you listed, the Golf will probably manage slightly better than 30mpg. Don't know about the others.
Never owned a hot hatch as can't see the point either. Regards fuel consumption and petrol engine sizes and types it does surprise me how poor some figures are. Seems 30mpg is the norm for a 2litre ish hot hatch, can't see why it shouldn't be 40mpg if not bouncing it off the limiter all the time. Surely low boost high compression turbo should be able to return figures almost as good as n/a when not needing the power. 1ZzFE Toyota engine found in mr2',s Loti, corollas etc could happily provide me with close to 40mpg when I had one commuting. My 2.7 twin turbo, 6 cylinder, 4wd, automatic, massive barge A6 that could house a family of illegal immigrants, that weighs in at close to double an MR2 still does 25mpg average and it has everything stacked against it, huge weight, auto box and full time 4wd. I'd feel robbed getting only 30mpg out of something like a golf.
fieldmau5 said:
Can you really get only 5 mpg less from a big lazy V8, in a heavier car compared to a 2.0 turbo hatch? I find that hard to believe. Sure on a motorway run, with the V8 barely ticking over it would be more efficient. But on a blast through some twisty rural roads or stop start urban commuting? I highly doubt it.
I own a 1999 5.7 V8 Camaro and a 1999 Impreza Turbo 2.0The Camaro is heavier, has an autobox and makes in the region of 140bhp more than the Subaru.
Not only does the Camaro offer up better mpg (24-26 vs 22-25 for the Subaru) it also runs on the cheaper 95 RON while the Impreza runs on 99 RON.
135i Coupé here.
She's thirsty; 21mpg on my south london commute. Might get 28 or 29 mpg on a motorway run.
Why?
Best of both worlds. Small hatchback size, big 3.0l straight six with twin turbos, RWD, taut handling, smiles per miles.
Suits me perfectly as both a daily and a weekend blaster.
She's thirsty; 21mpg on my south london commute. Might get 28 or 29 mpg on a motorway run.
Why?
Best of both worlds. Small hatchback size, big 3.0l straight six with twin turbos, RWD, taut handling, smiles per miles.
Suits me perfectly as both a daily and a weekend blaster.
Pan Pan said:
Not sure if it applies to the very small Vauxhalls but I had an Astra 1.6 hire care a little while ago
and thought it was amazing! Amazing how they could combine the full blown performance of a mobility scooter, with the fuel consumption of a 12 litre V10 in the one little car.
and thought it was amazing! Amazing how they could combine the full blown performance of a mobility scooter, with the fuel consumption of a 12 litre V10 in the one little car.
My mother in law has one and says the same thing. My father in laws old V6 Omega is better on fuel apparently.
Vauxhall engines are all pretty piss poor though IME.
Surely you are fudging the figures.
You can't quote the combined average figure from a manufacturer and then start quoting your own figures for your v8. Just how accurate are your calculations on your own car? Many real world driving situations would reveal that a 2.0T will manage far closer to 40mpg.
I guess you could also question what the point of any big car is if it is only YOU driving yourself to the train station.
Surprised no one has said buy a mx5 they do 40mpg regardless how you drive it - according to PH anyway....
You can't quote the combined average figure from a manufacturer and then start quoting your own figures for your v8. Just how accurate are your calculations on your own car? Many real world driving situations would reveal that a 2.0T will manage far closer to 40mpg.
I guess you could also question what the point of any big car is if it is only YOU driving yourself to the train station.
Surprised no one has said buy a mx5 they do 40mpg regardless how you drive it - according to PH anyway....
toppstuff said:
The thing is, I am finding it hard to justify or explain why cars like Golf GTI's, Renault Megane Sports, S3 Audi's etc, are so thirsty. How can it be that the damn things only do around 30mpg??
Given that you can get 25mpg out of a lazy V8, I fail to understand why on earth people would buy these thirsty hot hatches. If a hot hatchback is not good on fuel, then what is the point of it?
I suspect the issue here is that these are achieved in different circumstances.Given that you can get 25mpg out of a lazy V8, I fail to understand why on earth people would buy these thirsty hot hatches. If a hot hatchback is not good on fuel, then what is the point of it?
Owning a hot hatch and regularly give it the beans is going to give low MPG. Doing the same in a big V8 would give terrible MPG.
Timbola said:
135i Coupé here.
She's thirsty; 21mpg on my south london commute. Might get 28 or 29 mpg on a motorway run.
Why?
Best of both worlds. Small hatchback size, big 3.0l straight six with twin turbos, RWD, taut handling, smiles per miles.
Suits me perfectly as both a daily and a weekend blaster.
But it would have done around the same with the BMW 4.0 or 4.4 v8 offered up to 20 years ago. The 135 is a lovely car, but with all its extra complication and technology, doesn't actually represent any progress with efficiency. I'd expect much better from a small engined turbo. Yes you can remap it, but In standard form the old V8 would provide very similar performance.She's thirsty; 21mpg on my south london commute. Might get 28 or 29 mpg on a motorway run.
Why?
Best of both worlds. Small hatchback size, big 3.0l straight six with twin turbos, RWD, taut handling, smiles per miles.
Suits me perfectly as both a daily and a weekend blaster.
Dammit, i'm thinking about a v8 1 series now.
I have recent experience of this so feel qualified to comment
Old Car, Mazda 6 MPS - 2.3 Turbo producing 265 BHP, in the 2 years I owned it I averaged 26 MPG. On a motorway run it would sit at 3000RPM at 80 so I didn't even get 30 on a run
New Car, BMW 540i Sport - 4.4 V8 Auto producing 286BHP, currently averaging 28MPG. On a motorway run at 80 it sits at appx 2000RPM and on a run to Scotland and back I averaged 29.1MPG
And the tax is £230 a year cheaper and its a much nicer place to be
Old Car, Mazda 6 MPS - 2.3 Turbo producing 265 BHP, in the 2 years I owned it I averaged 26 MPG. On a motorway run it would sit at 3000RPM at 80 so I didn't even get 30 on a run
New Car, BMW 540i Sport - 4.4 V8 Auto producing 286BHP, currently averaging 28MPG. On a motorway run at 80 it sits at appx 2000RPM and on a run to Scotland and back I averaged 29.1MPG
And the tax is £230 a year cheaper and its a much nicer place to be
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff