18 MPG!

Right, this is going nowhere fast.

I provided the answer to your question yesterday at 7.25. If you want to split heirs, I answered in my very first post when I said I put petrol into my tank and found I wasted x on y. But I did further clarify it for your benefit.

Apart from you not wanting to waste your time on a potential idiot through distrust, I see nothing wrong with my post. Im getting 18 MPG, I have terrible fuel economy, Consult doesn't raise any issues, what can I look at?

The only importance in me answering whether I've calculated my MPG correctly, is so you don't waste your time. In all seriousness, i can't believe the hassle that not using three words has caused... why I didn't write "I topped up the fuel" instead of "I just put some fuel"... What a tactless idiot I am. That's picking flies in my book.

I have no real interest in continuing this conversation if it won't progress.

All in all though, I've answered your questions, can we move on?

Cya Simon

I think we might be getting somewhere...

...but apparently not.

You can't see it, can you?

Ditto. I tried to help with the fuel issue, and I've tried to help your 'presenting a problem' skills.

Done enough now with no effect, you're on your own.

Gone.

And you know why? Because you're being belligerent - not the best idea if you want people to help you.

If you want help, be nice. Ignore people being rude to you, and put up with people asking what appears to you to be silly questions. Humility helps here.

Don't worry about wasting other people's time by providing information they ask for. They asked for it : it's their problem if they asked for too much.

You'll notice I'm not necessarily displaying the traits I'm asking you to display : that's because I'm not the one asking for help.

cheers, clive

Simon Dean ( snipped-for-privacy@simtext.plus.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

Welcome to usenet.

I think you might be wanting uk.legal for probate queries.

The message from Adrian contains these words:

Or alt.bloodpsorts if it's hares.

You don't get engine braking on diesels.

Before the pantomime season starts, and people start saying "Oh yes you do", be aware that diesels do not have a throttle, but regulate solely by fuel quantity injected. Conor will point out that he uses a retarder of some type, which might be exhaust based, hydraulic, or electric. For details look here:

And while we are comparing statistics, I drive a 1.8 litre petrol estate, and over the past approx 6000 miles have got an average of 42.5 mpg at an average of 27 mph. I too use 'economical' driving techniques.

Sid

You don't need a throttle, it just increases the braking. Quite a lot of modern diesels have one for that purpose. Whether you restict the intake, exhaust or lift the exhaust valves it's still engine braking.

I think the main problem with autos is the viscous torque converter link which takes time to fully engage so although it may feel like its dropping in smoothly a manual box is out-in and engaged beforehand. Also theres more losses in an auto box due to friction and heating fluids.

Semi-auto (manual with electronic control) is best option speed-wise and efficiency wise.

Well you appear to be at least a bit clued up, but a lot of people would put £20 worth of fuel in, run it fairly near empty, put another £20 worth in, notice that the fuel gauge goes roughly up to the same level as the previous time, and assume that the distance they did is an accurate reflection of distance covered for the fuel used.

Are you stupid? We're not psychic here. Without you confirming it, we had no way of telling how you obtained that figure. Whether or not the figure is accurate is really quite important. How the figure was obtained has quite a big influence on its accuracy. Is that really all that difficult to comprehend?

Yep, true. I just find it amazing that you didn't think that things like worn cam/followers and not accelerating properly might possibly be related to the engine not running as properly as it should do, and hence be linked with fuel economy.

No, you couldn't be arsed to provide even relevant information, or just using your brain to a basic degree. See my previous paragraph.

Give the man a biscuit....

No, you didn't clarify it.

For one, your fuel economy is not *that* terrible. Here's our Graham with a quick reminder of the facts:

It's a petrol engined car. It's an automatic. It's used for a stop-start journey that averages 12mph, and for a reasonable proportion of the journey, a fair bit less than that.

At best, you could probably expect about 25mpg, so it's not massively out, but yes, it does seem a bit poor. But you *still* haven't mentioned what sort of economy it normally does *on that journey*. I know you don't seem too clued up as to what facts are and aren't relevant, but I'd say that the "normal" fuel economy for the same type of journey would be quite a good figure to include for comparison purposes.

Let's look at some more facts:

You were aware of worn cam + followers, and the fact that the car accelerates poorly (from which it's a fair assumption that that means "not as it should"), but didn't mention that.

The above would indicate that regardless of how many diagnostic devices you attach to the bloody thing, it's not running properly.

Could you not work out for yourself that the fact that an engine not running properly is almost certainly connected with poor fuel? If not, then your statement "Im not a dullard" could be questioned.

No, it's to do with the fact that a lot of people aren't aware of how to accurately do things. Well done. Pat yourself on the back. You aren't one of them. But without actually properly clarifying it, how were we to know? This has been pointed out several times now and you still don't grasp that simple fact.

I think the feeling's mutual if you're going to continue to be as much of an arse as you've been so far.

But the idea is to tell you when you need next to fill up. More accurately than the fuel gauge does. If it were based on any average it would be no use whatsoever for that.

The message from snipped-for-privacy@mail.com contains these words:

Actually, of course, some do have a throttle but it's for emissions control not for engine control.

Anyway, even without a throttle it still takes considerable effort to turn an engine over, diesel or petrol, so there's plenty of engine braking if you're use to it. I rarely use the brakes on mine.

Of course, if we were going anywhere fast we'd not be driving economically would we?

That's hairs.

Well, Im not a hairdresser either :-p

Good job - part of their job is to sort out split hairs, not actually split them :-P

You do realise that's almost certainly less fuel efficient than braking on a modern diesel?

If you use the gears and engine braking it keeps injecting fuel, if you stay in one gear to engine brake and use the footbrake too it cuts the fuel completely.

I accepted that point in an earlier post.

More accurately

The point I was really making is that there is no way the OBC can determine accurately how many miles are left in the tank at any given time. It will always be a guesstimate based on how the car has been driven in the immediate past. As it would be if it were based on an overall average instead.

Don't forget though, that even based an overall average, the predicted mileage would be the minimum distance one could expect to travel before running out of fuel. Still useful info if one is getting near fillup time, and driving in a more economic manner would of course increase the distance.

I do agree though, that the method BMW has chosen, is probably the most useful of the two obvious ways of giving the driver 'expected mileage' information. I was simply questioning the acuracy of the OBC's prediction. Mike.

Not on a diesel.

The message from "PC Paul" contains these words:

What makes you think I change down through the gears as I slow down? I never taught learners to and I don't do it myself. And anyway, the injection pump on the Moandeo is sufficiently crude that it doesn't play silly stunts like that.

Anyway, you may have that the wrong way round - the fuel is usually cut completely on over-run, and brought back in as you approach idle.