Kia Rio MPG

scaredofdebt

I suppose it depends on how much you earn - I was getting paid £16 (net) an hour in that job so the "saving" of £3 a day for the extra 16 minutes wasn't far off my hourly rate of pay, so worthwhile to me at the time.

If you earn £100 an hour then it's not worth bothering with fuel economy as time is more valuable but if you're on the minimum wage the opposite would apply.

Well, that's the theory!

Ultrasonic

scaredofdebt wrote: »

Is there a way to list cars by their real life MPG so I can see which one is best, I can't seem to find that option.

Sadly not. I suggested this on the Honest John forum once and was told pretty much that is wouldn't work as people would then lie to get their car top. Personally I still think it would be useful but I don't think it's a feature that will be appearing.

gilbert and sullivan did make some good points in relation to the real mpg data though.

In case it's of interest I'll mention that the Honest John data for my car does match pretty well with what I get. Here is my Fuelly record:



And here is the Honest John data:

http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/skoda/octavia-2004/19-tdi

The reported real mpg range is very close to the range I've seen between my best and worst mpg. My highest mpg of 65.9 mpg was achieved in very hot (30°C+) weather over mostly two long drives at 60 mph top speed. I do work at driving economically, particularly on my 9 mile daily commute.

Ultrasonic

scaredofdebt wrote: »

I suppose it depends on how much you earn - I was getting paid £16 (net) an hour in that job so the "saving" of £3 a day for the extra 16 minutes wasn't far off my wage, so worthwhile to me at the time.

If you earn £100 an hour then it's not worth bothering with fuel economy as time is more valuable but if you're on the minimum wage the opposite would apply.

Well, that's the theory!

I was thinking more of time for life outside work actually .

50Twuncle

Ultrasonic wrote: »

Don't get me wrong, I drive slower and more economically on my daily commute, but I do realise it takes me longer as a result . Your 8 minutes added to each commute means you're spending an extra 128 hours per year in your car (assuming you commute 5 days a week for 48 weeks). It's time I and many others would be weighing up as much if not more than money.

But my commute is 1/4 mile that takes me 2 minutes to drive (really !!)

keith1950

Originally Posted by scaredofdebt
Is there a way to list cars by their real life MPG so I can see which one is best, I can't seem to find that option.

Hi, from experience, especially with smaller engine diesels, I find that if you take the lower of the three mpg figures quoted by the manufacturer you won't be far out from the actual obtainable mpg.

Ultrasonic

50Twuncle wrote: »

But my commute is 1/4 mile that takes me 2 minutes to drive (really !!)

Stop being lazy and walk then .

scaredofdebt

Skoda Fabia Greenline, 70 MPG real world apparently. Short list is now 4 cars!

Kia Rio
Hyundai i20
Suzuki Swift
Skoda Fabia

Any more?

50Twuncle

scaredofdebt wrote: »

Skoda Fabia Greenline, 70 MPG real world apparently. Short list is now 4 cars!

Kia Rio
Hyundai i20
Suzuki Swift
Skoda Fabia

Any more?

Are we just talking about running cost of these cars - because I think that we should also bring in initial costs and depreciation as well as practicality - otherwise something like a Bambycar Peel P50 will win hands down !!
I rate the Suzuki Swift - extremely highly - even petrol - with VAT free (equivalent) offers on permanently with Suzuki - we have two in the family now, both petrol automatic that average 50mpg !
They are reliable, comfortable, practical, safe and economical to run - and they are cheap to buy in the first place as well as holding their value well...

scaredofdebt

Fair point, but when you're going to be spending around £400 a month on fuel MPG is quite important.

The car needs to be able to carry 5 people (it will usually be just the driver though) and be able to cruise on the motorway without undue stress.

I would rather buy second hand than new as you mention depreciation is an important factor in the overall cost, the Fabia is now looking the best overall choice all things considered.

Ultrasonic

scaredofdebt wrote: »

The car needs to be able to carry 5 people (it will usually be just the driver though) and be able to cruise on the motorway without undue stress.

If you were happy buying an older car (I think they stopped selling them in 2005) then an Audi A2 with the 1.4 TDI engine might be worth a look? You'll probably consider them too old, but they'd obviously be cheap to buy.

A Polo BluMotion is another obvious contender. Like the Fabia Greenline, this model attracts quite a price premium. It probably does make sense for your high mileage, but do some sums. Three people in the back of a Fabia or Polo would probably be quite cozy though?

Here's some more real data for the Kia Rio:

http://www.fuelly.com/car/kia/rio/2012/diesel%20l3

Fuelly.com is another place to look for real world mpg. Of course you never have a way of finding another driver who will be driving in the same way you would though.

Don't let me put you off the Rio completely. All I was merely trying to do earlier was warn you not to be banking on getting 88 mpg, and basing decisions on calculations using this figure. I'd have done the same whichever modern car you were looking at.

Also, with the amount of driving that you'll be doing I'd suggest that a comfortable seat and driving position should be key factors in which car you choose, not just mpg.