New MG ZS high fuel consumption and frosty glass shattering

Stubod

..thanks for the clarifications. It sounds to me like you really do "have a bad 'un", as that sort of mpg is truly pants from a modern 1.0l tr turbo engine? I would expect an average of at least 40mpg. (...used to get that out of a Yeti 1.4 AWD with "careful" driving)

Grumpy_chap

tifo said:

[Deleted User] said:

Clearly, the OP does incredibly slow journeys with massive amounts of engine idle time, I don't think any car would get much better economy.

Nope, I do shorter journeys and never leave my car on idle unless it's in the morning for maybe a few mins before driving off.

Idle time includes every junction, sitting at lights etc.  Not just what you might consider as idling (warm up before moving off).  On short journeys with cold engine, it is quite possible that the stop-start does not operate (that is normal).  Against the short journeys, time at traffic lights or the few minutes before setting off can be disproportionately high amount of the total engine running time and mpg will suffer heavily as a result.

tifo said:

MG say they give no mpg guarantee (from their specified figures) as it's all down to 'driving style'. 

As does every car manufacturer.

lordmountararat

my insurance is high due to various factors, such as postcode and ethnicity

It would be illegal, as well as incredibly stupid, for an insurance company to allow your ethnicity to factor into you premium.

tifo

lordmountararat said:

my insurance is high due to various factors, such as postcode and ethnicity

It would be illegal, as well as incredibly stupid, for an insurance company to allow your ethnicity to factor into you premium.

I don't know if it's illegal but they 100% do it, it's been proven in news media and amongst the population that get screwed.

Try it on a comparison site by changing only the name on a second check and see what happens ....

https://www.thesun.co.uk/motors/5393978/insurance-race-row-john-mohammed/

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60837074

https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/uk-news/2022/03/22/ethnic-minority-drivers-in-uk-pay-more-for-car-insurance

tifo

lordmountararat said:

my insurance is high due to various factors, such as postcode and ethnicity

First it was The Sun, then the BBC… now it’s The Times’ turn to unveil the findings of its own investigation into alleged discriminatory pricing by insurance companies. And, no, it’s not the usual name/ethnicity test.  

According to The Times, home and car insurance premiums are being priced based on how wealthy, or poor for that matter, customers seem to providers – from the smallest of indications such as someone’s choice of internet browser when looking for policies online.

Here’s what the newspaper found, either through mystery shopping or industry insiders:

• A prospective insured living in a flat will be charged as much as 10% more for motor insurance, even if the customer resides in the same area and drives the same car as a house-dweller.
• Divorced men, stereotyped as having lost money to their ex-wives, are likely to pay 8% more for home contents insurance.
• Those who use Safari when browsing are said to be favoured when it comes to prices, simply due to the assumption that they own an expensive Apple device.

The premise being: the more well-off a policyholder is, the less likely a claim will be made.

tifo

Stubod said:

..thanks for the clarifications. It sounds to me like you really do "have a bad 'un", as that sort of mpg is truly pants from a modern 1.0l tr turbo engine? I would expect an average of at least 40mpg.

I'd be happy with 28-30 mpg. That's what I used to get on an older 1.6 petrol non turbo car.

It is a bad un but can't do much about it yet.

Grumpy_chap

tifo said:

According to The Times, home and car insurance premiums are being priced based on how wealthy, or poor for that matter, customers seem to providers – from the smallest of indications such as someone’s choice of internet browser when looking for policies online.

Here’s what the newspaper found, either through mystery shopping or industry insiders:

• A prospective insured living in a flat will be charged as much as 10% more for motor insurance, even if the customer resides in the same area and drives the same car as a house-dweller.
• Divorced men, stereotyped as having lost money to their ex-wives, are likely to pay 8% more for home contents insurance.
• Those who use Safari when browsing are said to be favoured when it comes to prices, simply due to the assumption that they own an expensive Apple device.

The premise being: the more well-off a policyholder is, the less likely a claim will be made.

You seem to have put the reasoning in the final sentence of your post.
Insurers take all the data in aggregate and past history influences future premiums for people in that category.

As to "the more well-off a policyholder is, the less likely a claim will be made" seems to have two very obvious reasons why that would be.  

• Firstly, someone that is well-off, say they earn £100k per year, might well simply not bother with small claims.  So, a damaged carpet (wine spill) or roof damage in a storm but only a smallish bill to fix (say £2k).  The wealthy individual might be more likely to just pay the cost and not think about the bother of claiming.
• At the other extreme, someone with an absolute stretched budget might be more likely to need to claim anytime and / or submit exaggerated claims.  

Insurers will have aggregated data that supports whatever risk assessment they perform in calculating premiums.

The motor insurance difference between flat and a house probably reflects a real difference in risk.  Car parked on the drive is more visible to the owner than car parked in a block car park.

I have no doubt the insurers have something that establishes the risk profiles for divorced men as well.

tifo

Coming back to this as the fuel consumption was recently checked by the dealer, they emailed several pictures showing 32/33mpg in the current mileage screen, I asked them for the accumulated mileage screen as they drove it local for a week but they didn't send this. As I was having issues with the central screen and dashboard screen also, they reset the software.

I've had it back a week and the mileage has gone up by a few mpg, i.e. to approx 22mpg from 19mpg but this may not stay the same. Since i've had it for nearly 15 months, it's never got to 20mpg local.

I don't know how they got 33mpg but i don't think it was all local from the distance and time taken.

Stubod

..why not offer to take them out on a local ride of about 20 miles and see what mpg you get?...still sounds like pants to me for a modern 1.0 ltr car??

Have you been on any MG forums and posted this...may be worth checking to see if it a common problem?

born_again

tifo said:

lordmountararat said:

As already mentioned, check that the computer is not set for US gallons. US gallons are approx 20% smaller than imperial gallons. (3.78 litres to a US gallon; 4.54 litres to a UK  gallon).

I calculate the mpg from the amount of fuel put in, from the money paid. It's definitely not on US gallons as my figure is usually a half mile to 1 mile less mpg than shown.

You calculate MPG from miles done & amount of fuel put in. Price does not come into it.

https://www.mpg-calculator.co.uk/

Stop looking at the average MPG on the dash & run tank to tank checks. But need several to get any sort of average.