[Closed] What do you call good MPG?

So Gribs I would be better using my wifes 30 mpg vtec honda auto than my (diesel shitbox, 45 minimum mpg) to help conserve fossil fuels, tell me how that works then.

You'd be better off using a bike 🙂 My 25mpg petrol does very minimal milage as I've got bikes as well.

28mpg in a VW Touareg R-Line

Not bad for a 2.5 ton car I do t think. That includes lots of town centre driving.

I do use a bike but i need a car for 10,000+miles a year 😆

I do use a bike but i need a car for 10,000+miles a year

No one needs a car. If you're that much of a tree hugger then change your lifestyle so you don't need one or need to do as much as 10k a year

I am not a tree hugger I work in the oil industry.
Next.

The two standard answers to this seem to be:

"I get high mileage, turn my nose down at anything less"

"I get low mileage but I have a damn bloody big sports car".

Mods, feel free to close the thread now.

I would be better using my wifes 30 mpg vtec honda auto than my (diesel shitbox, 45 minimum mpg) to help conserve fossil fuels, tell me how that works then.

Why doesn't your wife drive a 45 mpg diesel shitbox as well then and help save more of our precious resources?

The 30 mpg Honda does 600 to 800 miles a year. Hardly worth buying a new car to get another 10 mpg.
Next.

Wholly depends in journeys. My car usually does around 43 mpg average, busy stop start commutes, bike rack always on, a few longer journeys and around 250 miles a week. Last 4 weeks I have been off work after an injury and wife has been using my car. Its short, stop start stuff, 5-10 miles at a time. Has managed 2 tanks, each averaging 35 mpg. surprisingly low and very similar to her usual in her own car, which is a 1.6 petrol kia soul.

Mine is a diesel bmw 520, 8 months old with 15k on the clock.....

iainc : Careful now, there's some folk on this thread that would out you to the daily mail for using/wasting our precious resources for such a journey of under 10miles - cue cries of you should be walking, riding a bike, taking the bus, finding alternative transport, buying a horse etc...etc....

FWIW my mates fuel bill for his various vehicles amounts to tens of thousands of gallons per month so i guess his mileage is counted by gallons to the nautical mile, that's if we're allowed to count fishing boats along with his wifes 4 mile school run back n' forward twice a day in the supercharged range rover or porsche panamera.

cat.....pigeons.....it's an absolute needless massacre.

1.6 HDI berlingo.

Average about 45mpg which is not bad for something with the aerodynamics of a brick.

Someone doing 15k a year in a diesel shit box will use far more fuel than I do in my 25mpg petrol. They'll also release far more harmful pollutants. Btw breeding is about the worst thing you can do if you care about the environment.

Yeah so lets all not have any children and save the planet for future generatio.... oh wait! 🙄

1.9 tdi 130ps Passat estate

Average over lifetime of 41mpg. Average over the last few thousand miles I've owned it of 43.

Its 'good' mpg to me because it's a very comfortable place to be, it will do that mpg whilst doing 80-90mph on the commute or loaded with bikes and kids and dogs. It's smoothness, 6th gear and stability at speed is worth more to me than its lack of low end torque (80% of the time anyhoo)

How very presumptious molly 3000 miles between mots at 25mpg vs doing 10000 at 50mpg ...... Very few short ( <10 mile journeys)

Ill live with 25 mpg and choosing to live near my work so i can cycle instead of that extra bedroom and en suite another 20 miles away

To get a 4 x4 twith a 2 tonne tow capacity that does 40+ mpg id have to buy a very modern car - my old one would probably go to scrap - wonder what the fossil fuel needed to build a new car would be ?

pmindmap3 - Member
I'm always happy with our 330 which does mid 20's around town and 30 and a bit on a longer run (motorway and fast country lanes).

However I'm permanently disappointed in my diesel Fiesta that just about scrapes 54 despite a claim of 67 and getting an easy life on the motorway sitting at around 70. Not only that but it sounds horrible and stinks when it's started up.

It's not a claim, that's what it did on the test which is completely unrealistic. It only spends 10 seconds at motorway speeds for example and there is no hard acceleration at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_European_Driving_Cycle

Aye our old 1.4golf did about 45 mpg round town - but thanks to really low gearing to let such a small engine move such a heavy crap car it would drop to 25 on motorway @ 70 anyway.

Might of been better had it had a 6 and 7th gear ..... It needed them .

I can only dream of 40mpg from any of our vehicles!

Mrs Mini Cooper S R53 does about 23-30mpg depending on how it's driven, does 3-4000 miles a year, generally around town, most of the time she commutes by bike.

My Peugeot Expert work van does about 35-37mpg in the real world, most of my jobs are within 20 miles of home and I need to carry a load of tools and materials, I have to keep a roof rack on it for the few times I need larger materials on site. This does 7-8000k miles a year.

The T5 Camper does around 38mpg real world figures, mainly on long motorway/continental trips, and averages around 8000 miles a year.

I could sell the Mini I suppose and swap it for a more frugal car, however it's not worth a lot so selling it and adding several grand into the pot to save £500 a year on fuel and tax not really worth it. Maybe when it's knackered we might consider a more economic car but it'll be a good while yet hopefully.

I'd happily save fuel on the work van but not possible at the mo, I'd switch to electric/hybrid if available.

[i]Quite right molgrips I hope they have a clear conscience when their grandkids have no fossil fuels to use because people drove stupidly thirsty cars so they can get to 60 about 3 seconds faster than most others. [/i]

A few cars ain't got nothing on these guys:

And Vectra TD auto at 40mpg and Freelander 2 TD (190bhp) auto at 30mpg

[i]No one needs a car. If you're that much of a tree hugger then change your lifestyle so you don't need one or need to do as much as 10k a year [/i]

You've never need to travel with your job then? I use to 40k pa.

Why on earth do people think thus is a valid argument? 15,000 miles at 50mpg is indeed using more fuel that 3,000 miles at 25 mpg, well done.

However 3,000 miles at 25mpg uses more fuel than 3,000 miles at 50mpg. So it's still not as efficient s it could be, so you are still wasting it.

Regardless of how many miles are fine, if they are done in 25mpg boy racer, you ate wasting fuel. This is of course not the only way to waste fuel.

Show me a 50 mpg 4x4 with at least a 2 tonne tow capacity ? That costs 2grand.

We are not all taking tarquin to dance recital.....

Show me a 50 mpg 4x4 with at least a 2 tonne tow capacity ? That costs 2grand.

We are not all taking tarquin to dance recital.....

The point you completely missed in your bubble is that first step to saving fossil fuel is to minimise usage. Which i have done .

BMW 320d ED - long term average 63mpg, on a motorway run 70+ (Which seems ok from an 8 and a bit second 0-60 car)

S-MAX 2.0d163 - new yet but 40-41 on average.

I'm a bit out of touch with all these super-efficient modern vehicles; I reckon on about 32mpg average in my 2002 Toyota Hi-Ace van.
Rather than costing mpg I calculate my running costs at 39p/mile based on 8000 miles/year (excluding depreciation and not having any finance costs).

Been looking at changing my Fiesta for a while now and the whole MPG comparison is doing my head in!! I get 45 mpg out of it all day despite it being a 1.25 with 133k on the clock and chipped to 100bhp from the 74 standard since I got it. I do 17K annually, mostly long runs as I ride to work, so on the cusp of the petrol/diesel argument. Looked at various small cars and the figures just don't add up for buying the eco models most of the time.

Take the Fiat 500 as an example. I can get a 1.2 Pop for £9k locally which will do 45-50mpg whereas the TwinAir is over £14K!!! Even taking into account the better fuel economy (test car was showing 65mpg after a good test drive) it would take me 11 years to be better off with the TwinAir. Depreciation doesn't come into it for me as I buy new and run them until they are no longer viable (well serviced etc). I'm guessing the extra premium on having the trendy eco models skews the figures a bit! So far I'm better off by a mile keeping the Fiesta until it dies a horrid death 😕

Even taking into account the better fuel economy (test car was showing 65mpg after a good test drive) it would take me 11 years to be better off with the TwinAir.

The price of tax dont you mean ?

Why on earth do people think thus is a valid argument? 15,000 miles at 50mpg is indeed using more fuel that 3,000 miles at 25 mpg, well done.

However 3,000 miles at 25mpg uses more fuel than 3,000 miles at 50mpg. So it's still not as efficient s it could be, so you are still wasting it.

Regardless of how many miles are fine, if they are done in 25mpg boy racer, you ate wasting fuel. This is of course not the only way to waste fuel.

Because if you already own the car, that you don't use much, it's still more economical than using a load of fossil fuels in the production of a new one, lest we forget the actual cost in buying the new one.

We have a 23mpg car that's worth £3k that gets driven less and USES less fuel than someone doing 30,000 in a 50mpg vehicle. we still use LESS fossil fuel than they do. what's the point in having a brand new £20K 50mpg car sat on the driveway?

[i]Depreciation doesn't come into it for me as I buy new and run them until they are no longer viable (well serviced etc). [/i]

Of course it does. It's a cost, just like fuel.

trail_rat - Member
The price of tax dont you mean ?

Indeed but then once we stop using loads of fuel( right) - what will the goverment tax then ? food? Sunlight?

trail_rat - Member
Indeed but then once we stop using loads of fuel( right) - what will the goverment tax then ? food? Sunlight?

mikewsmith - Member
Is that taking into account fuel prices rising 3 times a year every year until it's gone?
[img] [/img]
br />

On the same page that image was taken from is the inflation adjusted version, which tells a different story:
[img] [/img]

There is so much sanctimonious and ill-informed opinion from certain individuals on here with newer and more economical cars. I'd be fascinated to know how their carbon footprint compares to that of those us running older less economical cars but doing lower mileage and flying infrequently and cycling to work and living in a well insulated fairly cool house and working in a barely heated business unit (delete as applicable).

I'd be fascinated to know how their carbon footprint compares to that of those us running older less economical cars but doing lower mileage and flying infrequently and cycling to work and living in a well insulated fairly cool house and working in a barely heated business unit

Why?

We have a 23mpg car that's worth £3k that gets driven less and USES less fuel than someone doing 30,000 in a 50mpg vehicle. we still use LESS fossil fuel than they do.

Yes, that has been made clear. However buying a 50mpg does not mean you HAVE to do 30k miles a year. Your argument makes no sense. If you buy a car that does 23mpg and isn't a van or something you need, then every mile you drive is wasting fuel. There are plenty of old cheap 45mpg cars out there.

Because if you already own the car

Why buy it in the first place? And even if you bought it used, someone bought it new.

The way some people talk you'd think this was a competition to gain moral superiority, rather than reduce emissions and conserve resources.

depends what old means to you ....

and many of those older that do 45mpg really suck the fuel up when you go on the motorway.

speaking of conservation - anyone with their thermostat still in the hall or running 100watt filament bulbs needs to get off their high horse.

do you suggest we just scrap all cars that get less than 50mpg then ? you should run for prime minister if that's your plan - be just about as good as our governments other ill thought out schemes

someone has to drive them because like it or not they already exist and you can moan till the cows come home but you will not change the fact that the car already exists. - scrapping them would be a carbon footprint nightmare - bit like the scrappage scheme was.

I agree we shouldn't buy new ones - but till they are gone they are still greener than building a new car from diminishing resources - btw have Toyota figured out how to make the prius environmentally friendly yet ?

I'm abit late in the conversation but as others have pointed out fuel is only a proportion of running costs. In most cars, within reason (excluding the extreme ends of the spectrum of high cost cars), in my experience the total running costs of a car is approximately 12-15p per mile excluding fuel based on 15k a year. When you're comparing a car that does 40mpg on petrol or 55mpg on diesel the actual total running cost difference between them is much smaller once you add the running costs. Plus don't forget to value your time in the vehicle you are driving.

I spend a good amount of time in a my car, and while what I drive today is a boring cheap petrol car it atleast has a modest bit of power and doesn't require shifting gear all the time to hit that magic diesel powerband. When I last bought a car, the petrol lower mpg cars were less than half the price of an equivalent diesel. The petrol car was much nicer to drive for the budget I had. I can handle paying a few more pence a mile to not drive something dire.

However if you're spending a larger amount of money on a car, those good mpg diesel have a lower running costs as the depreciation is so much lower.

If I were spending below £3k on a car I'd say an average of 36mpg or better is good, go for a petrol as the mileage on the car will be lower.

If I were spending over £8k, I'd want over 45mpg and diesel. I'm not interested in a 60mpg crazy efficient machine as I still want something that isn't dull to drive and will actually handle being driven fully loaded for long journeys.

There are some ridiculous cars for sale these days that hold their value much beyond common sense, like 10yr diesel fiestas with 90k on the clock for £4k as the average person thinks mpg is all that matters.

My current car cost me £1500 with 80k on the clock, today it's got 115k on the clock, still worth a grand and does 36mpg average and ~40mpg on a run. IMHO that's good.

do you suggest we just scrap all cars that get less than 50mpg then ?

Of course not. But there are plenty of 45mpg cars going to scrap and 25mpg ones being bought.

have Toyota figured out how to make the prius environmentally friendly yet ?

Yes. Do some research and you will find out how.

I'm not interested in a 60mpg crazy efficient machine as I still want something that isn't dull to drive and will actually handle being driven fully loaded for long journeys.

Passats can carry plenty of stuff and still do 60mpg. A BMW 5 series touring should be able to too. Not at all out of the question for a big diesel on long trips.

A good week is 35mpg thats for a 2.4 alfa oil burner.
Pressing the right pedal is addictive but overtaking and watching the trip computer drop to 16mpg isn't.

Got a turbo capri that will get worse mpg with roughly the same power.

[i]in my experience the total running costs of a car is approximately 12-15p per mile excluding fuel based on 15k a year. [/i]

Doubt it, try doubling it (tax, insurance, tyres, servicing, breakdown-cover etc).

Our best was a Clio 1.5dci would often get up in the 80s and averaged over 62 in our ownership but it was one of our most unreliable cars and the money spent on it made it more expensive to run than a Scooby, which was often low 20s and hard to get 28 but only needed servicing and nothing else.
Full life costs on three of our cars
Clio 1.5dci 30,000 miles - 44p per mile (did 62mpg overall)
VW Passat 1.9tdi 142,000mies 32p per mile (did 42mpg overall)
Citroen Xantia 1.9hdi 240,000 24p per mile (did 38mpg overall)
Our typical driving is brisk but not foot to floor, motorway miles at 80ish.

Currently our Old Vito is doing rather well (high 30s, 40ish on a run, low servicing costs and little else) especially for a van but our Aygo (annoying little thing) is not doing so well (currently averaging 38, mostly short journeys but same as Clio above, but keeps going wrong, clutch at 30k, new discs, new exhaust and cat) especially for a newish small hatch.

So many factors and unless one is doing the miles mpg is not the most significant in our experience.

Ps bikes more extreme 100 plus out of Honda Cub but struggle to get much more than 35 out of my big old beamer. Reckon the racer is easily in the teens, poss low teens but flat out two stroker.

My current car cost me £1500 with 80k on the clock, today it's got 115k on the clock, still worth a grand and does 36mpg average and ~40mpg on a run. IMHO that's good.

what is it?

Have had a couple of VAGs with figures like that, but could be a Volvo etc, unlikely to be a Ford or Vaux though!?

chiefgrooveguru - Member

There is so much sanctimonious and ill-informed opinion from certain individuals on here with newer and more economical cars. I'd be fascinated to know how their carbon footprint compares to that of those us running older less economical cars but doing lower mileage and flying infrequently and cycling to work and living in a well insulated fairly cool house and working in a barely heated business unit (delete as applicable).

I run an 18yr old car that does an actual 50mpg average, which I do very few miles in.

Do I win a prize? 😀

Late to the fight but thought i may add to the post:

I have a 8 month old 3L V6 TDI Mercedes and it does an average of 38mpg (sports estate)

my wife has a 2 month old Mini countryman 1.6 TDI it is meant to do around 45-50mpg but struggles to do 35mpg ???

?

Vauxhall Corsa 1.4 litre Auto Average 60 mpg. Driven normally, not too slow and not pedal to the floor.

Honda CBF 125 motorbike 100 mpg I use it for commuting

Suzuki Gsr 600 35mpg average that gets thrashed when it's dry.

Skiboy - engines take a long time to loosen up - up to 20k miles sometimes. Also remember the quoted figures for mpg are not what you should expect. If in a year's time you are not getting 45mpg around town in that car I'd have a look at your driving style tbh.

20k miles to loosen up an engine . Its not 1972 anymore.

TDI (sports estate)

The dealer saw you coming

😉

Is it the e350 cdi - 320 ish bhp - with the amg sports pack it handles and goes much nicer than any of the blandboxes folk love so dearly on here.

Loved my parents one.... One of te few conventional cars id entertain these days after finding the joy of vans!

Having spent most of the time since I got a licence with a series / defender
Anything above 20 seems cheap to run lol was very happy with my Renault master doing low 30s
But I don't do many miles by car each year

But getting bored going slow so time for another fun/ quick ish car this year

sbob - Member

I run an 18yr old car that does an actual 50mpg average, which I do very few miles in.

Do I win a prize?

No, you are destroying the world by wasting this resource- you should give it to someone who will drive more miles and therefore save more fuel. You scum.

Both our cars are 2.0t petrols and both average between 30 & 35 mpg which I think is good for what they are (Ford S-Max and Saab 9-5 Estate). I certainly don't feel the need to change them for diesels.

My old V8 Range Rover is the least economical car I've ever owned. IIRC I think it was averaging around 12-15 mpg, but I was only doing a couple thousand miles per year so it didn't bother me.

I run an 18yr old car that does an actual 50mpg average, which I do very few miles in.
Do I win a prize?

If you have a tall enough stepladder you get to push molgrips off his stratospherically high horse and claim its saddle. 😉

This is nothing to do with sanctimony. I'll freely admit my carbon footprint isn't great at all.

But the facts are the facts. It's precious stuff, we should not be pissing it away.

trial rat,

its the C350 AMG sport plus with 265hp and a whopping 620NM of torques,

I think its quite legit to call a 155mph (limited) autobahn storming estate a 'sports estate' but then what would i know i'm only a lowly F1 engineer.

i know one thing i didn't buy the petrol version through choice and i couldn't afford the AMG C63 this year but i might be able to at the end of this season 😀

From my extensive records.... 🙂

Vespa GT200 74mpg
Piaggio X10 72mpg
Ducati ST3s 44mpg
Ducati Monster 696 52mpg (mostly being thrashed to within an inch of its life)
Honda NC700X 74mpg (that's just the first fill, I'm hoping to get it up to around the 80mpg mark)

And remember none of those get stuck in traffic either 🙂

EDIT
I used to have a Honda CG125 that cost me £250. I used to get bored waiting to put fuel in it, yes it was slow but it easily exceeded 110mpg all the time. £6 of fuel used to last me something like 3 weeks!
No good for a 50 mile round trip motorway commute 5 times a week though!
I lost the back end on a wet roundabout once, I just lay there laughing as it span round on its footpeg, got up, kicked the starter twice and rode off. Fantastic bit of kit.

Some jumped up people on here really.

What has my fuel economy got to do with you and who are you to say I shouldn't get a car with low MPG?

Is it not a free country?

I chose a car that suits my needs. It has a low MPG but I accepted that when I bought it and pay tax (fuel and 'road') at a higher amount as a consequence.

The green willy measuring competitions on here are great. In a nearby thread you'll find the same people condoning driving the length of the country to play in the woods, and justifying spending thousands on toys to play with.

Your carbon footprint is directly proportional to how much you spend. It doesn't matter what you spend it on. We nave an oil based economy. Money is oil.

Oh... anything over 30mpg is good for me.

This is nothing to do with sanctimony. I'll freely admit my carbon footprint isn't great at all.

But the facts are the facts. It's precious stuff, we should not be pissing it away.

You cant pick and choose these things , just because you drive a pious doesnt mean you can ignore the other areas of your carbon footprint that are pissing it away and lecture others on their choice of car.

What about carbon pffset rangerovers 😉 Where they pay to have a bunch of trees planted in exchange for a little sticker on the back that says carbon offset ?

I agree with 5thElefant and perhaps would go further (?)

Every last drop of oil will be sold, some day there will one day be a war over resources, I don't see how this can't happen...

The nuclear disaster in Japan with Japan admitting it can't meet its emissions targets how do you see that?

what is it?

A 2004 2.2 Petrol Vectra.

Some jumped up people on here really.

What has my fuel economy got to do with you and who are you to say I shouldn't get a car with low MPG?

Is it not a free country?

50mpg is my vote

just because you drive a pious doesnt mean you can ignore the other areas of your carbon footprint

I don't think that. I make an effort in all areas. Not as much as I should though, as I admitted earlier.

In a nearby thread you'll find the same people condoning driving the length of the country to play in the woods

No you won't.

What has my fuel economy got to do with you

Lots, because we live together.

Recently become the owner of a BMW 320d efficient dynamics. Over my first 5k miles, the worst I've achieved is 50mpg which was on my first tankful, with running in and town driving. Since then I'm regularly getting 60mpg on mixed town and motorway driving.
This is actual mpg calculated from brimming the tank rather than the trip meter figure which is normally between 5 and 10% higher.
By comparison I previously had a 2.0 ctdi 160 Insignia. That gave a best of 50mpg,but typically returned 45mpg.

30-35mpg is good mpg.
My little 1.4 partner spazvan does 43-45 if I drive at it's comfy speed- 65mph.
My 2.4 A6 estate does 30-33 but can bowl along at 80mph.
My old 911 did 26-30mpg depending on if it was a long run at 90mph or if I was screwing along the back roads playing tunes on the gearbox.
If I can't run it on veggie then I don't really have any interest in a diesel car and all the raised fuel prices that goes with (£1.27 ul v £1.38 d here). Never mind the extra maintenance bollocks on modern diesels.
The commuter motorbike does 59mpg.
I guess living somewhere rural has it's advantages with traffic.

@ Peter Proddy, 'Honda NC700X 74mpg (that's just the first fill, I'm hoping to get it up to around the 80mpg mark)'

My NC700X (DCT) has averaged 83 mpg so far, 79.9 being the worst and 85.8 being the best.
I can truly say that I look forward to filling it up 🙂

My NC700X (DCT) has averaged 83 mpg so far, 79.9 being the worst and 85.8 being the best.
I can truly say that I look forward to filling it up

Sounds good! 🙂
I think the DCT is meant to be (very) slightly better than the manual 'box to be fair, as is the newer 750 engine, but looking at the graph on Fuelly I'll be disappointed if I can't hit high 70s at least.

I've got a bigger Puig Touring screen to go on it on order, there's a possibility that could help too. Fitting a screen made a noticeable difference to my GT200, both in top speed and fuel consumption

I'm loving the bike too. It's a totally new riding experience, for sure, but it makes me smile a bit and it blats around town very nicely and is very relaxing on the motorway. My last bike was doing 7000rpm at 70mph, the NC is doing exactly half that.

Good to see the BMW 320d getting good figures, BMW seem to be one of the worst at cheating the standard tests so I have always been sceptical of the high figures for the 320d.

Yes, the economy is superb, the DCT is great, my commute to/from work includes the M25 😡 so can be slow at times, it really works so well in heavy traffic and the dual mode is a nice option to have too.
I very much like the laid back relaxed attitude the bike gives, the low revving torquey engine is very different from the 'Street Triple it replaced, a very good bike, but not quite me and my knees and elbows weren't liking the riding position!
I have a Givi screen, Acerbis hand guards and bigger foot for the side stand, this year it should gain a centre stand and some hard luggage.
The 2014 '750 should be better, but I'm in no hurry to change, wouldn't be worth the cost of changefor the very little I'd gain.

This thread is making me jealous... 🙄
This is my daily driver which I put about 300 miles a week on. 5.4l V8 pickup.[img] ?t=1388935142[/img]
My plaything is even worse, but it doesn't get much use... 6.3l V8 pickup.
[img] ?t=1388935448[/img]