mpjod wrote: »
I take this scandal as seriously as the ppi scandal and we should be compensated for the additional costs incurred by ourselves because of the discrepency between the fuel figures advertised by the motor companies and the actual figures acheived. this is a significant amount of money over many years.
mpjod wrote: »
I was informed upon buyinmg my car from a main dealer that i would get 46 mpg. I keep track of my fuel use and have never had more than 33mpg this is a massive difference. I have tried every conceivable way of driving and the figures are the same every time. I dont rely on the cars computer to tell me I do the figures myself using the amount of fuel required to fill the tank against the amount of miles I have travelled, its scandalous and represents a fuel bill that is 25percent more than I was promised.
Trebor16 wrote: »
Simple lesson here is to take a salesmans claim with a pinch of salt. Look on sites like www.fuelly.com or www.spiritmonitor.de to see real life examples of what people actually achieve. In short, do your own research and don't believe a salesman who is trying to sell a car and earn some commission.
Mary_Ta wrote: »
The best website for realworld mpg is the German "www dot spritmonitor dot de slash en" website. As they claim on their front page it contains data for over 300,000 vehicles and 4.6 billion miles of motoring. Its calculated for each user on a tank to tank basis, you can search by vehicle type, fuel type etc. and it provides barcharts of consumption distributions, averages etc. - you can then drill down to look at consumption patterns on individual cars. If you can't cope with l/100km, either divide the number into 282, find a conversion website or setup a login to the site. It is likely to be more accurate than wither whatcars site or honestjohn's equivalent.
When you pay at supermarket fuel pumps
DON'T assume your landlord covers you
Incl £2ish sun cream & £1.50 disposable BBQs