Ford Focus, just to kick things off. The 1.6 petrol autos were awful (had one in NI as a hire car) - and in anything near the level of kit offered in the Prius, you were paying over £20k.
(And although they're the same size on the outside, the Focus is a lot smaller inside)
Well, I'll take my experience and 60k miles over your conjecture.
I had one of the lowest average MPGs on the fleet, but still didn't see a tank drop under 44mpg.
Official figures are useful for comparison purposes and are more than adequate for ascertaining a particular vehicles efficiency. "Real world" figures are undefined and vary according to a huge number of variables. Whether you actually achieve the official figures is largely irrelevant; what is more important is that they give an idea of how one vehicle compares to another under the SAME conditions.
But they don't - mostly because some manufacturers are better at playing the official consumption figure game than others.
BMW are the biggest offenders - the 320ED has some amazing 'official' figures - but nobody even gets close in the real world.
On the other hand, VAG figures are generally much closer to real world figures - although they are getting better at playing the game, as getting this right also has an impact on the emissions rating.
Sadly, it's all too easy to for the official ones not even to be a useful comparison as the car doesn't see a road.
Something like the Autocar touring route is far better as a comparison between different models.
I am comparing otherwise identical cars in the same range, not one model with a completely different one. This is where you will find, on average, diesel models are 40% more efficient than a petrol of equivalent performance. I'm not saying all diesel models have such a massive benefit as my car compared to it's petrol counterparts. The 1.7 CDTi in the mk4 Astra is 50% more efficient than the most economical petrol (1.4) and 60% more efficient than the 1.6 you would probably want to buy to match it in performance. But if you want a more up to date comparison, take a look at the engines in the current Astra SRIs. 1.7 CDTi 128bhp 300Nm torque 74mpg. The most economical petrol is the 1.4 16v with 98bhp 130Nm torque and 51mpg. The diesel is still 45% more efficient and utterly annihilates any of the vaguely sensible petrols in performance.
Glow plugs have much longer service intervals than spark plugs. Often they last the useful lifetime of the vehicle. I have had 3 diesel cars now and NEVER had to replace a single glow plug.
Dual mass flywheels are nothing new. They've been around since the early
90s. They're fitted to a lot of petrol models now too.As we are talking about used cars in this thread, we have the benefit of a number of years of data to know which cars have issues and which don't. When buying a used diesel, you just have to look into each particular model and assess its potential weaknesses. It's not difficult to avoid models that have known issues and buy one that's likely to be reliable.
It probably is only 20 quid a month if you don't compare like for like.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not completely averse to petrol cars. My 2nd 'weekend/fun' car is a petrol, but I would never have one as a daily driver.
Agreed. We've run several 850s, S70's p1 V70s & p2 v70's. Now two S60's. Utterly reliable, hard wearing and even if it does need work, it all comes apart easily. Parts are Mondeo money.
I'm driving a 06 S60 SE Lux geartronic at the moment, and no way would I swap it for any BMW / MB / Audi machinery. It's the non DPF'd 2.4d flavour ( = better mpg than the d5) with a MTE 220 remap. 50mpg is easily possible and simply flies when asked.
Handling goes from 'surefooted but abit mushy' to 'on-rails' with the addition of Koni shocks and a IPD rear a/r bar.
Extremely under rated cars.
Tim..
A mate has a new A3 2.0 TDi Sport (start stop version). It's got just a few thousand miles on the clock, so not even loosened up yet but he's averaging
60mpg. Not far off the 64mpg quoted and phenomenal considering the performance of the thing.I don't have a fuel computer in my car, so when I've measured the mpg it's been actual fuel used rather than an electronic guesstimate. If I incorporate a few long journeys into my tankful I have often matched and sometimes beaten the 61mpg quoted. Even going 17 miles each way to work on shitty little roads I average 56mpg, not far off the official 61mpg.
I've never had a car that's been drastically different from the official figures, but I agree some manufacturers are definitely a bit optimistic. Honda's figures for their 2.2 CTDIs spring to mind...
Not as 'completely different' as you think - they're both based on a common platform (the Passat is essentially a Golf that has been scaled up about 10%) and weights are very close.
74mpg / 51mpgPull the other one!
This is why the official figure comparisons are so hopeless.
But they're on the service schedule and, on average, cost 5 times what a spark plug costs.
Some petrols, but, as you say, many diesels over the last decade.
All modern diesels are considered to be ticking time bombs with their high pressure injection systems - mostly because the components to repair any faults are hugely expensive.
I'm making comparisons based on closely related cars, in real world conditions, rather than quoting official figures, which are nonsense.
You may have to soon, as diesels are being taxed out of the market both via fuel duty and company car BIK taxes. (Most diesels are sold to fleets and they're looking increasingly unattractive over the next few years as they get bigger loadings for being more polluting than petrols
- which is why I'm on my 2nd petrol company car in a row)
I conclude you and your friend are cardigan wearing dawdlers with a queue of traffic getting increasingly frustrated behind you.
Most cars have service intervals of 40K miles for plugs; some in the US are 100K!
I've certainly seen diesels that have needed (expensive) glow plugs before 50K
Chris
No, it's totally shit for something with a 1.5 petrol engine, that has no performance whatsoever..
. and that doesn't vary
He does drive like a granny, that's what's so disappointing about it!
I'm sorry, but since when has a Ford Focus (or a Prius for that matter) been a "large" car?
A Honda Jazz has more space inside than a Focus for a start..
They're 'kin massive!
I reckon a MkII Focus is not far off the size of your Xantia - they dwarf our 156 and 75.
I don't know where 'no performance' comes from - 0-60 is 10.9 seconds, which is largely average for that class of vehicle. They're deceptive, as it sounds like the engine is working hard when under load, but that's just a feature of CVT compared with more conventional boxes.
Then there's something wrong with it - given that I was very close to that driving mine like I stole it.
We're also talking about an 8 year old car now, things have changed significantly in that time - and the new Prius has moved with the times to become very definitely an alternative to the usual diesel hatch.
I'll never understand the hate for them - I think they have gained a really bad reputation on the back of seriously shit reporting - and the bile spouted by Clarkson.
However, if you read some of the road test reports for them (Parkers, for example), they are considered to be more than competitive in the class.
I'd buy with my own cash - just so long as I still had a weekend toy or two - because they do make a lot of sense as daily commuters.
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 19:36:03 +0000, SteveH stammered:
It's (a 2008 T-Spirit) is just over 2 seconds quicker to 60 than my unaerodynamic Berlingo, and only 6mph faster flat out. For a modern car, pitted against what is essentially a diesel van, it is really isn't performance. Anyway, 0-60 doesn't really matter, and I'm guessing that the paltry 115nm of torque in the Prius versus the 205nm in the Berlingo actually works out that in real world driving, the Berlingo is somewhat nipper. Mine is for sure, as it's remapped..
Same in my dad's Jazz, CVT-7. Always sounded like it was working hard, but to me, 3000rpm or so *is* working hard unless I'm pressing on. Berlingo or Xant never really had much cause to go above 2krpm unless on the motorway.
It seems fine. He does live at the top of a big hill in High Wycombe, and does go up and down it often which may impact it, but other than that, he's 28 going on 75..
And that says it all... I'd rather keep the £15k in the bank and just have something more interesting. £15k buys a lot of petrol or diesel to run something that will outperform a Prius in every way..
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 19:36:03 +0000, SteveH stammered:
It's (a 2008 T-Spirit) is just over 2 seconds quicker to 60 than my unaerodynamic Berlingo, and only 6mph faster flat out. For a modern car, pitted against what is essentially a diesel van, it is really isn't performance. Anyway, 0-60 doesn't really matter, and I'm guessing that the paltry 115nm of torque in the Prius versus the 205nm in the Berlingo actually works out that in real world driving, the Berlingo is somewhat nipper. Mine is for sure, as it's remapped..
Same in my dad's Jazz, CVT-7. Always sounded like it was working hard, but to me, 3000rpm or so *is* working hard unless I'm pressing on. Berlingo or Xant never really had much cause to go above 2krpm unless on the motorway.
It seems fine. He does live at the top of a big hill in High Wycombe, and does go up and down it often which may impact it, but other than that, he's 28 going on 75..
And that says it all... I'd rather keep the £15k in the bank and just have something more interesting. £15k buys a lot of petrol or diesel to run something that will outperform a Prius in every way..
You're making the usual mistake of only quoting the petrol engine torque.
It's rather more impressive if you quote with electric assistance - which is 400Nm @ 0rpm...
Performance matches or betters most diesels with the same-ish peak power (ie. VAG 1.6TDI, Focus 1.6TDCI).
3k rpm is only working hard if you're comparing with a diesel - most petrols are only just getting into their stride at that kind of rpm.It's still firmly in the green 'eco' zone in the Alfa 75!
That'll impact any car - my Golf, for example, returns high 20s if I do a run to Cardiff and back via Caerphilly mountain.
If I do it down the dual carriageway, going round the mountain, I get another 10mpg.
Alternatively, running something like a Prius means you have money in your pocket for an MX5 toy... (The same holds true for all the other 'eco' options - Bluemotion / Econetic etc.)
Actually they're not a service item on the 1.7 CDTi used in the mk4 Astra. (I just verified this in the service schedule booklet that came with the handbook.) They are designed to last the lifetime of the vehicle. Obviously if they fail you would replace them, but otherwise you leave well alone. Depending on which engine you have, service schedule for spark plugs are 20k or 40k for petrols.
I'm not even sure that glow plugs are as important on CDTis, as common rail injection gives a very fine mist of fuel and air mixture making starting from cold much easier. My car doesn't have a glow plug light like the previous 2 diesel cars I had - you can just start it immediately, although that might be because it cheats by charging the glow plugs when you operate the locking.
Also interesting is that transmission oil change is not on the service schedule either for manual cars, as the unit is sealed for life. The gearbox doesn't even have a drain plug.
What an absolutely crazy idea.
For the consumer, anyway.
For the manufacturer, it means a steady income stream for their workshops and new cars.
I can't remember the last car I owned that had a transmission oil drain plug; none that I can recall in the last twenty years or so.
Chris
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.