Realistic MPG of older small engined cars?

ScoobyDoo69 · 13 Jan 2011 at 14:33

Sounds the same as my Dturbo model then. So about 500 miles to a tank around town then? Does that sound right?

Dogbreath · 13 Jan 2011 at 15:03

ScoobyDoo69 said:
He too has similar circumstances to myself, town mpg matters, so don't question why I need to know, just answer please.

If he's doing 60 miles a day around town, suspension, tyre and brake replacement costs will probably rival the fuel bill.

lordrobs · 13 Jan 2011 at 15:14

ScoobyDoo69 said:
Sounds the same as my Dturbo model then. So about 500 miles to a tank around town then? Does that sound right?

No idea. When I had my one I never did enough solid town driving to get an idea of the economy.

Fuzz · 13 Jan 2011 at 18:28

Clarkey said:
A slight tangent I know, but have more modern petrol engines really improved much in this respect?

They were improving until someone had the bright idea of blocking half the exhaust up with a catalytic converter.

mattyprice4004 · 13 Jan 2011 at 18:35

Scubascorpion said:
Thrashed to within an inch of it's life for 337 miles non stop (solid 85mph all the way) and still returned 38 MPG.

I managed that in my 620ti at similar speeds, although around town you'd probably do triple my mpg.

[TW]Fox · 13 Jan 2011 at 18:41

mattyprice4004 said:
I managed that in my 620ti at similar speeds

No you didn't

mattyprice4004 · 13 Jan 2011 at 18:43

[TW]Fox;18221236 said:
No you didn't

Was about 80 on the 'nav 85 on the clocks, going to Silverstone a couple of years ago.

Is this going to turn into a willywaving economy thread?

georges · 13 Jan 2011 at 18:43

1.1 L-reg fiesta with all sorts of engine issues gets 45mpg ragging it anywhere, without fail.

[TW]Fox · 13 Jan 2011 at 18:46

mattyprice4004 said:
Was about 80

And the story changes already

EddScott · 13 Jan 2011 at 18:50

A while back someone on SNet was selilng a Suzuki Ignis 1.3 (think it was 1.3 anyway) with LPG. Don't think it was worth very much (it did have recaros

) but I think running costs were very low.

mattyprice4004 · 13 Jan 2011 at 19:04

[TW]Fox;18221279 said:
And the story changes already

Because everyone goes by the clocks, thought I'd include the GPS reading for accuracy...

Berger · 13 Jan 2011 at 19:04

Peerzy said:
Yes and No.

They probably have got better but new cars weigh so much more.

I could get 50MPG easily on my 1.2 2000 Punto, on the OH's 1.2 2006 Grande Punto I can get about 42MPG.

Over the lifetime of the car, my girlfriends 1.2 Fiat 500 has managed ~44mpg.

It returns very similar MPG as it does on the motorway at 75mph where the economy isn't fantastic due to the shortish gearing and small engine.

Imagine it weights the same or less than a 2000 Punto though.

Peerzy · 13 Jan 2011 at 19:24

Berger said:
Over the lifetime of the car, my girlfriends 1.2 Fiat 500 has managed ~44mpg.

It returns very similar MPG as it does on the motorway at 75mph where the economy isn't fantastic due to the shortish gearing and small engine.

Imagine it weights the same or less than a 2000 Punto though.

The Punto weighs 5kg less and has 9 less bhp out of the same engine (not much but when the total is only 60 v 69 it's quite a percentage).

DRZ · 13 Jan 2011 at 19:31

I get somewhere around 15-18mpg around town.

I only slightly care about fuel economy but really the higher the better. Who really honestly doesn't care one iota how much money they spend on fuel?

Peerzy · 13 Jan 2011 at 19:34

DRZ said:
I get somewhere around 15-18mpg around town.

I only slightly care about fuel economy but really the higher the better. Who really honestly doesn't care one iota how much money they spend on fuel?

Me.

6-7 miles to work, 6-7 miles to work.

MPG I find is usually proportional to how quick/powerful the car is. I'd much rather get < 10MPG and have something really fun to drive than my car where I get 30~MPG atm.