is it true about the ford fiesta econetic

vikingaero

martinthebandit wrote: »

er, I don't think cars are tested on a rolling road any more for mpg, IIRC its all done by computer simulation now.

There was a magazine article in (I think) Auto Express which showed the MIRA testers with the cars indoors and on a rolling road. The driver followed a graph on how much he had to accelerate/decelerate.

The Auto Express reporter went first and produced his results. Then the MIRA engineer went next and showed something like a 8% improvement in MPG over the reporter.

Whilst they use computers to measure MPG and show how the car should be driven, the actual operators are very much the humans.

Strider590

fivetide wrote: »

Er... he's saying Honda were spot on. They quoted 35mpg and it did 35mpg. The problem is with a Ford....


5t.

That's what I was saying.........

Trying to point out why the Honda did what it said on the tin

fivetide

Well that's cleared that up then.

Those economical (with the truth) Japanese eh?

Actualyl one that did happen like this, another Watchdog story, having a go at Mercedes because the Smart cars didn't get the advertised mpg. Anne Robinson got all huffy as usual and started accusing them of lying, when in their own feature they spoke to someone on a fuel saving challenge in a Smart who had got better figures than MB quoted! Terrible journalism but shows how much comes down to environment and driving style.

5t.

z3phyr04

I would normally take any quoted MPG figure with a pinch of salt and take at least 15% off it before it seemed any more real. My Nissan is quoted at 47.1mpg combined. I have never gotten above 43mpg being as careful as possible without labouring it at all.

37 is my worst and I had to thrash it a bit to achieve that, high revs gear changing when coming onto A road and motorways etc and braking to a stop instead of letting it slow itself down on slip roads and upto junctions.

But I would ignore all these wild 70mpg claims, the real world does not have 100% free flowing traffic on any road and every driver is different. While we're on about mpg, Fuelly has been a very useful tool for me since I started using it.

Outpost

martinthebandit wrote: »

er, I don't think cars are tested on a rolling road any more for mpg, IIRC its all done by computer simulation now.

I doubt it.

Even in today's climate of rather dubious advertising practices I think they'd have a hard time making that one stick.

antrobus

See here - http://www.theautoindustrieblog.com/2010/11/how-fuel-consumption-is-tested.html- for 'How Fuel Consumption Is Tested'.

JonathanA

It really does depend on how you drive, where you drive and the type of journeys you're making. I've got a 15 month old Fiesta 1.4 diesel, and that is averaging 60 miles per gallon (worked out manually, not reliant on the average fuel computer in the car). That is a mix of town, country and motorway driving (up to about 70mph - anything more than that and the economy really drops).

Is your driving style the same as when you were driving a petrol car? With the diesel you'll rarely need to go above 2000 revs and if the car is new, the engine will need to loosen up a bit.

Probably worth checking with the Ford dealer whether it needs any software updates as that can make a difference.

Official fuel consumption figures are all calculated in the same way, but take no account of the real world, so I doubt very much whether you would be able to replicate the figures exactly, though you do appear to be a long way off what it should be doing.

Outpost

antrobus wrote: »

See here - http://www.theautoindustrieblog.com/2010/11/how-fuel-consumption-is-tested.html- for 'How Fuel Consumption Is Tested'

Seriously, would it have killed you to check the link worked before you posted it?

moonrakerz

daveyjp wrote: »

MPG figures are purely for comparison purposes, not an indication of what YOUR car will do as we all drive cars differently.

Absolutely spot on !

Fuuny - my last 3 cars have been Fords and ALL of them have produced better mpg than the "official" ones !

Last weekend we did a trip to the coast and back, 160 mile round trip.

Book figure for my car 42.5 mpg - achieved figure 47.2 mpg. Outward leg was 50.7 mpg !!
(1.6 petrol engine)

And, NO ! - I don't have a huge queue behind me either :rotfl::rotfl:

Lifes_Grand_Plan

Have a look at http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/ to see what other owners of the same car are getting... makes very interesting reading.