Real mpg

vikingaero

The 2.2 diesel pre 2011 only ever came with a manual gearbox. There is a 2011 Accord diesel that comes with an autobox but the price is going to be north of £22k.

iNath

greenman7 wrote: »

Try www.fuelly.com for "real life" consumption figures, make sure you use uk measurements (top left hand corner).

That's good and I use http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/ myself.

FATBALLZ

Really depends on how you drive it and where you drive it, my car is 33mpg urban and 53 extra-urban (43 combined). I got nearly 50mpg on my journey the other day (20 miles on 70mph roads, 15 urban), although I was the only one in the car, the weather was ok, didn't get much traffic in the way, and the petrol was quite low (so the car was lighter). I do drive with fuel efficiency in mind as well.

bigjl

I remember many years ago, I traded in a 405 diesel for a brand new Seat Toledo, new shape, 99T.

The Seat had a VAG 110 tdi engine and was reported to give 50mpg easy, with 65 mpg possible on a run.

A mate had a Golf estate with the 90bhp tdi engine and he regularly got 60mpg round London, with occasional runs to suburbs, we did night shift so less traffic.

My Seat wouldn't go above 45mpg, if I hammered it, it did 45, if I took it easy, it did 45mpg. I drove to Glasgow at 70mph the entire way, it did 50mpg.

My 405 would do 40mpg all day, with up to 48mpg on a run.

So I had financed to the tune of £13000 after my £4000 trade in, for very little financial benefit.

I liked the Seat, it was a really nice Met Blue colour, but I regretted selling my 405, which though high miles was still only 4 yrs old, but bought and paid for.


The reason I post this story is sometimes buying a new, fancy car to get better fuel economy doesn't work out in the cold light of day.

property.advert

You have to get your head around the fact that fuel is only one aspect of the total cost of ownership. What you have to do is look from now to the future time of change of car and work out the realistic costs. You'll need a spreadsheet for this as there are many costs varying from depreciation (over the time you have the car), financing, insurance, tax, servicing etc. as well as fuel.

Just to give an example. Say the total costs to change your current car for another one would be £5k over 3 years then you have a monthly cost of £139. If you currently spend £250 a month on fuel, then you need to get that down to £111 to break even, meaning that you need a vehicle which does a real life 2.25 times the mpg of your current car.

That is probably unrealistic, getting a 70mpg car instead of a 30mpg car and any attempt would see you in a super mini, though new, against your current car.

A trade off is that you get a new car. That comes with warranty out to 5 or 7 years if you want, reliability and surety. Your older car comes with the potential of large bills which can wreck any financial decision to keep it.

It is not an easy argument to make to yourself as your new car is going to be devoid of toys and options if you are truly worried about costs. There comes a point where large miles in a small car without options makes life quite hard. I looked at the Hyundai i10 and immediately discounted it - it was terrible. I'd rather economise in other areas of my life if I had to.

tgon

iNath wrote: »

That's good and I use http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/ myself.

Good site - just what I was looking for.

Using that and http://www.eforecourt.com/l_100km_mpg_convert.htm helps my calcs.

dannymccann

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

So, deduct 20% from all figures???

You see its the opposite for me...my 2001 Astra 2.0DTi book figure is 49mpg but if I do a proper motorway style run and be sensible, 65-80mph it will easily get 55mpg or more (I find it very difficult to just do the same speed all the time without cruise control, I'm 22 though so thats my excuse :rotfl: ).

Also in 3 years the car has had 4 oil changes, 2 new brake pipes, 2 new tyres and front discs and pads - nothing ever seems to go wrong with it so its great, no chance I would replace it for something newer, not yet anyway

knightstyle

We have just done this, sold our Scenic and Smart Fortwo. Downsized to one car, a Toyota Auris 1.4 diesel auto. The saving in fuel on the two long journeys so far is very noticeable compared with the Scenic. I am amazed how even with a tiny diesel and automatic it keeps up with traffic and has enough for quick overtaking at legal speeds.
So test drive a couple of smaller engined cars, you might be pleasantly surprised.

cyclonebri1

dannymccann wrote: »

You see its the opposite for me...my 2001 Astra 2.0DTi book figure is 49mpg but if I do a proper motorway style run and be sensible, 65-80mph it will easily get 55mpg or more (I find it very difficult to just do the same speed all the time without cruise control, I'm 22 though so thats my excuse :rotfl: ).

Also in 3 years the car has had 4 oil changes, 2 new brake pipes, 2 new tyres and front discs and pads - nothing ever seems to go wrong with it so its great, no chance I would replace it for something newer, not yet anyway

Actually I was just rounding off a previous post, the figures weren't exactly what I have found myself.

I have a small diesel engined car and find under ideal conditions and stating a journey with a warm engine I can just about match the official fuel consumption figures in the book, I've never bettered them and from cold at this time of year the a 10 mile trip that could return 55mph is more likely to be 35 :eek:

getmore4less

An average % off claimed mpg isn't a bad idea actually...

Easier to get your current MPG add a fiddle(20% ish ) factor to make it worth changing and then just use the claimed numbers.

One calculation rather than one for each car you look at.