I think the design of the Prius is just as much fashion driven as any other car. It certainly isn’t rumple fugly because it has to be to achieve its low drag. A Volvo c70 from the same era achieves the same figure as the mk1 Prius for example.

Really don’t think that’s true. Prius is that shape for a reason. You’d have to show me the cd figures for a 2003 Volvo V70. Toyota have always claimed the Prius (since mk2, no-one’s ever seen a mk1 I bet) had the lowest drag coefficient of any production car. Not sure they’d be able to lie outright.

Edit: wow, someone’s been collecting these figures

http://ecomodder.com/wiki/index.php/Vehicle_Coefficient_of_Drag_List

MkII Nissan Micra FT overall W!

Are you Tom, of Killin?

Or Yaris’s – our old D4D ran on fumes, and never cost much in repairs.

matt_outandabout – Member

Are you Tom, of Killin?

Nope, but I do love simple cheap motors.
Or mammoth V8s.
Both good.

My 1976 Ford Falcon I drove around Australia in 1994 might not make the grade. 4.2 litre petrol engine

I was driving a Falcon around NZ in about 1996..it was only a 3.6l though…I have Falcon envy!!

My 1.8 focus petrol does about 47 to 48 on the motorway. On my 9 mile hilly commute. Avg is 30 to 32 which isn’t great.

I’ve got my GTM K3 kit car (1.8 vvc ~170bhp) to an amazing 52mpg when driving very carefully on A roads (and 28mpg when driven properly!).

This is in comparison to the cars my parents have/had which are at the opposite end of the spectrum;
-Jensen Interceptor ~17mpg (with fuel injection, was ~12mpg on carbs)
-Jeep Wrangler ~18mpg
-Jag XJS ~21mpg
-MG ZTT 260 ~23mpg
-Saab 9000 Aero ~24mpg

I don’t understand this, is this just a reading while youre going along or the average over some period? I had one for two weeks and got nowhere near that (and I was ferrying my 87 year old granny about so we were crawling along the motorway at slug pace)

(and I was ferrying my 87 year old granny about so we were crawling along the motorway at slug pace)

Why?

The missus manages over 70mpg in her Citroen C1.
I don’t.

Got your numbers wrong there….Google reckons that the current Fiesta is 1045-1163kg.

So, you’re saying a MkI Fiesta weighed 163kg?
My ’94 M Reg MkIII Fiesta weighed around 895kg from memory.

You’re right.. I mistook GVW for curb weight when I looked, with the diesel fiesta having a GVW of around 1.6 tons. Mk1 fiestas were a svelte 680kg though.

Well because I was driving with very slow and gentle acceleration and slowing down very gradually just by lifting off the gas rather than braking. Best case scenario for fuel I would have thought, yet I was getting 40-42 at the absolute best. Round town it was low 30s. Basically about what I’d expect to get from a 2 litre N/A lump.

@retro83 – reading – average – taken off the info dial admittedly – would say it’s consistently a good 10mpg better than the old P plate Saab 900 !!

The better half has a new Polo 1.2 TSI- despite only being 5spd, it can average a good 58mpg on the motorway, or 53mpg on our average commute (mix of A-roads & b-roads).

A roads, bit of town driving, admittedly drive like grandad a bit — 1.4 TSI Skoda Octavia estate – 60 plate.
Can kit 50mpg on long journeys – Elgin – Edinburgh/Glasgow, 170 odd miles.

Maybe not with bucket loads of kit as well, but regularly get around the 45mpg on a practical load lugging car..

I have a 63 plate 1.2TSI, I can get slightly better, I have seen 60mpg+ on gentle longer journeys (it’s a bit lighter is the mk3 so the power is adequate from that engine, even if not particularly exciting). I think the reason many people don’t get the benefit of the more efficient engines etc. is that many these days have more power available, and the figures indicate how they compare if driven without using the power.

I find it’s not too horrendous around town, 45mpg or so is realistic, 50mpg to work and back (which is pretty stop/start) is my benchmark when I use it (it’ll be worse on cold days etc.). On hilly routes cruising around 70 it’ll get 45-50mpg, and driving it like you stole it, or never using stop/start around town it’ll drop to 35-40mpg.

Edit – 60mpg was Inverness to Fort William and back, 60mph limit, but slow traffic and not many overtaking opportunities (plus little to be gained from overtaking with the amount of traffic at that time) so I just sat there and pottered. I got quite excited by it.

I was getting consistent 40mpg tank-tank in my Skoda VRS 1.4TSI. I think that DSG gearbox makes a huge +ve difference as it’ll happily chug along in 7th gear when sat at 40mph in traffic – huge saving.

Rachel

The better half has a new Polo 1.2 TSI- despite only being 5spd, it can average a good 58mpg on the motorway, or 53mpg on our average commute (mix of A-roads & b-roads).

The VW Tsi engines are very economical. My Octavia 1.4Tsi gets 52mpg going from Glasgow to Skye and back. 46-48mpg on motorways. Worst I’ve ever had for general use is 41mpg

I do follow the anticipate and slow by lifting throttle school of driving though. Some drivers may get a few mpg less.

My previous car was a 1.8 petrol Mondeo. The Octavia puls away better at low revs and at the same time gets around 10mpg more than I got with the Mondeo.

chestrockwell

I had a 1.4 TFSI Leon estate in FR spec, the 150bhp version. It was fantastic, easily got 45mpg on a mixed commute, long trips would see 55+ It was also pretty quick, easily as quick as the Octavia VRS we also looked at

Strange since the VRS (assuming also a petrol one?) is 220 PS. Guess it probably weighs a bit more though.

retro83

Strange since the VRS (assuming also a petrol one?) is 220 PS. Guess it probably weighs a bit more though.

It’s probably within spitting distance of it. IIRC the current VRS range is at least three years old. When they revise it they’ll probably be smaller engines or higher bhp per litre.

My 3.0 petrol (non-turbo) is currently managing around 35mpg combined which I find is more than acceptable when it’s got around 270bhp on tap too.

@alanf, what car is that?

My guess would be a BMW 3 series.

amIrite amIrite amIrite? 😛

And here’s me getting 28/29 MPG from a motorbike every day (city commute)! 😯

I’m sure my T4 was better on fuel than the bike.

@alanf, what car is that?

My guess would be a BMW 3 series.

amIrite amIrite amIrite?

Yep, 330i – 2009 with the N53 6 cylinder.

You need a supercharger.

My 3l petrol XF does 34mpg and it’s got 380bhp 🙂 Obviously not the right car for this thread.

The wife’s Mazda 3 has an NA 2l petrol at 120bhp and can do a smidge over 50mpg if you’re careful.

Anyone know about the Astra? (Yeah, I know I know!)
I drove an Astra pool car once, an SRi and it was a nice drive. I hammered the thing and got back to work, and the MPG said somewhere in the 50s I’m sure! I couldn’t believe it. (My memory is hazy and I had a Saab 9-3 petrol at the time (32mpg) so maybe it was around 40mpg and seemed amazing..)

I once drove an older Astra diesel van, and that did something like 55 or 60mpg. Experience with newer Vauxhall diesels suggests that each newer version has been less economical. I used to have a Saab 900i which was pretty thirsty, although it didn’t bother me at the time. I once got through a tank at 15mpg when I thrashed it.

My first car, a 1978 2CV, used to do 50mpg on a run. That was literally driving with your foot on the floor on the motorway, and doing about 60mph.

Me too, it was awesome. Flat engines are the best.

Trip computer mpg is nearly as inacurate as “official figures”, usually 10% higher than reality.

tom200

Trip computer mpg is nearly as inacurate as “official figures”, usually 10% higher than reality.

They used to be. Now I think they’ve gone the opposite way slightly. I’ve used fuelio in a few new cars and found the cars were delivering better than indicated mpg.

Got a new astra 1.4 turbo on lease. Just about to hit 2k miles so nearly run in. From new average mpg is 40.1, for some reason i hoped for better though doubtfull as i explore the rev range.

2013 1.2 tsi bluemotion stop start Golf

Does 52mpg ont he computer without trying on the 18 mile daily B road and country road commute – hardly any “stops”

My lexus gets mid 40s and seen on a long a road it touching 50mpg. This from a 2.5 l petrol with over 200bhp and a big 4 door saloon. Hybrid systems do work…. The new mercs apparently do 60+real world….

I see the Mk2 Prius has the same Cd as the Carlton my Dad had in 1986, which could fit 5 adults in plus a couple of bodies in the boot. That’s progress for you! 😉

My brother was saying his V8 M3 consistently does more MPG than its miserable official figures and my even more venerable Civic Type-S is pretty much bang on the 37mpg figure (40+ happens on motorway stints). Cars do use less fuel than they used to (although way more than official figures say) but I wonder how much cheaper they’ll be to run with all the added turbos, direct injectors and so on to service.

Best Micra CC (1600cc, 2007 year) and 2000 vintage Yaris 1.3 both mid 40’s mixed driving with quite a bit of city. Old 1000cc Metro was relatively poor (low 30’s) in fact overall worse than a 2.7tdi quattro I had – definite quality and progress on display there.

Would definitely consider a Hybrid, Yaris or Auris

My old astra 1.7tdi never dropped below 55 and would easily top 70 on a steady motorway run. It was an 04 model too. I replaced it with a 1.2 polo (3 cylinder) and it’s shocking really, 42 average. Very annoying, so much so that I check the brakes every trip to make sure they are not binding. I would have hoped for upper 40s at least

A mate has an Aygo mk2 , that he charges about in, thinks it’s fun as well, and is averaging high 50s overall.

I see the Mk2 Prius has the same Cd as the Carlton my Dad had in 1986

I think there may be other factors in fuel economy. It does show how the weird styling of the Prius is just that, though.

convert – Member
My 1976 Ford Falcon I drove around Australia in 1994 might not make the grade. 4.2 litre petrol engine that must have been putting out at least 70bhp and 100kmh on a good day. That would do 15 mpg if you treated her right. Mind you at 50c per litre and the exchange rate at the time it only destroyed the planet not my wallet.

My father’s 1970 model was going well to get near that.

They did improve though. I bought a Fairlane new in 1985 and it was good for 25mpg and could come close to 30mpg on long trips. My next one in 1989 was better. That was the new series 6 cylinder engines and fuel injection.

Step forward to 2006 and on a visit to Oz I hired a Fairlane for a few months. I was able to nudge it up to 38mpg on long drives (cruise control set to speed limit +10% 🙂 ) and that amazed me for such a big heavy car. Shame they discontinued them, I actually thought about bringing one over.

E-class 220d, aero 0.26 (Molgrips hello? Prius best aero?) Average 61.4 over 22k mixed driving, drove it like grandad on M1 to London from Northampton (it was busy traffic) at 50mph … and hit 88mpg. Couldn’t believe it was better than my Passat.

0.26 (Molgrips hello? Prius best aero?)

Prius on that list is 0.25, which is less than 0.26 last time I checked.

It does show how the weird styling of the Prius is just that, though.

Wtf list are you reading? Current model drag is 0.25. That shape is clearly the best aero shape. It may be that other things about the car are less aero than the Merc, or that Merc have done a better job in the fine details, whatever, but the shape is not just made up by a stylist. The shape itself comes from aerodynamics principles. That’s my point.

real world on a focus 1.0i 125ps – 1k miles from new never reset computer 45.6 mpg (pretty good considering ive had it in winter in the cold from new)

had a focus 1.5tdci 120ps before – 9k miles never reset computer 61.2mpg when I swapped! (pretty incredible)

focus st 2.0tdci 185ps before that – 8.5k miles never reset computer 51.5mpg

prefer petrol hence gone back to it, drives much nicer than diesel, ideally petrol ST would be my choice but at probably circa 30mpg fuel would kill me