|
My In-Laws' second car, a 12 year old Ford Ka, is heading gracefully to the end of its life. They are now looking for a replacement. The new shape Fiesta has been assessed as a potential replacement. We had a look at a few at the local dealer - a few surprises. Very strong residuals on quite high mileage cars. High proportion of petrol engined versions, including the well known and gusty, heart of gold, 1.25 four cylinder and the three cylinder 1.0 Ecoboost.....Now I know that this is a techy engine but I wasn't quite prepared at what looks like a 120bhp, Zero road tax, oodles of torque and 65mpg claimed economy.....what price noisy dirty diesels eh ?
Last edited by: R.P. on Thu 28 Apr 16 at 23:08
|
>> 65mpg claimed economy.....what price noisy dirty diesels eh ?
The economy might be a let down. Seems usual with these little turbo petrols. Our Popemobile 1.2TSI 105PS is supposed to do 49 but we struggle to get 40 overall.
|
My 1.4TFSI A3 is meant to get over 60mpg on some official tests I believe. Best I've got is about 45mpg. Fine by me for my mileage. Around town it's low to mid 30's.
I've had diesels that get nowhere near official MPG with me. So probably me.
I choose the car because of BIK and low mileage.... interesting choice again in a year.
|
We've done the fuel consumption thing so many times that we should all be able to recite it by now. RTJ has a smallish medium petrol car that averages high 30s. A diesel equivalent would be high 40s, low 50s if he's gentle. A Fiesta has less mass to accelerate, so will use less fuel in doing it.
Engine efficiency improvements can help a little; Humph's S212 gets into the 40s where my S211 is stuck in the high 30s - although even that is partly because his journeys are longer and probably smoother than mine.
The point is that a smaller engine makes a car capable of greater fuel efficiency. My six-cylinder 325 will never achieve 50mpg, whereas a four-cylinder 320 might, but drive the 320 to its performance potential (limited by traffic and safety factors) and it'll be down in the low 40s like mine. What's new is the availability of small engines that are capable enough to at least give drivers the opportunity to achieve that efficiency, but the driver still matters more than the engine.
|
Very succinct WdB
The trip computer on my 330 is currently showing 39.4 mpg after a leisurely 100 mile round trip to the Lakes yesterday. Even allowing for optimism its still probably mid thirties. Mixed driving, excluding any city stop start, returns a genuine 32mpg with spirited driving where possible.
It's replacement will have a smaller capacity 4cyl 2.0 petrol so I expect mid thirties, but it's really irrelevant for me given my low annual miles. The big hit is depreciation on a newish replacement, somewhat mitigated by long term ownership.
|
You can add my diesel Civic into the mix now - 1.6 diesel and I have never averaged less than 60mpg on a tankful including long haul journeys and also commuting in stop start traffic.
|
|
Not very useful on its own, Bobby. As it's about the driver, too what were you getting in similar use from your previous car?
|
Last car - ix35 2.0 diesel - struggled to get 38mpg on same journeys.
Altea 2.0 TDI - max about 43
Scenic 1.9dci 120bhp - mid 40s
Scenic 1.9dci 105 bhp - early 40s
Scenic 1.9 turbo diesel (non common rail) - high 40s
|
|
That's remarkable. Honda has always had a reputation for clever engines. This suggests there's some basis to it.
|
When I did my research before buying this car, the overwhelming majority of the feedback on the Honda forums was that owners were getting close to the quoted mpgs and then when I took the car out for a test drive I noted the trip computer had never been reset and it was showing a high figure as well.
Best I have got so far was in the SPECS controlled roadworks after Scotch Corner when the car averaged over 100 mpg for that stretch!
Not quite as good as these guys who averaged it over 8387 miles though!
www.autoexpress.co.uk/honda/civic/92127/honda-sets-new-efficiency-record-with-100mpg-civic-run
|
|
Our CR-V with the 120bhp 1.6 diesel is averaging 52mpg as measured over 18k kilometres from new, not bad for a largish car. And that includes some long stretches of 140-150km/hr on the autobahn. Pussyfooting today showed 3.7l/100km after filling up, which if I calculate it correctly is around 76mpg.
|
|
Hi Mike, nice to see you back on here. Hope the journey home was a good one and all is well with mother and baby.
|
Thanks. After 8 different beds in just over two weeks it was nice to be back! The blizzard in Belgium last Tuesday livened up the journey, but we did enjoy good weather in the UK.
Son, d-i-l and baby all fine. Coping well it seems, and our little granddaughter is, of course, beautiful :-)
|
|
I think the Civic estate is a nice looking car, very practical too. Shame it's not available with a 2.0 Vtec petrol engine.
|
>> The point is that a smaller engine makes a car capable of greater fuel efficiency.
Exactly, and that is what goes into the official figure. But who then drives a car with a 105bhp engine as if it had a 55bhp one?
>>What's new is the availability of small engines that
>> are capable enough to at least give drivers the opportunity to achieve that efficiency,
And capable of producing more power (which you can't have without higher consumption) and proportionately more of that at low rpm than a NA engine. Without 'trying', the charged engine can be much quicker off the mark in normal use.
I've just waved the boss off in her Popemobile and it took off very smartly indeed despite probably barely breaking 2000rpm. There's a price for that.
Even so, in deliberately gentle use by me on a mostly extra urban 130 mile round trip to Cambridge last week we only saw c 42 on the computer.
Properly measured whole of life mpg is currently 38.1, 33% down on the official combined figure. Her typical trip is about 9 miles each way. Obviously doesn't help.
|
>> but
>> the driver still matters more than the engine.
>>
In the days of journalistic car testing, I'd often do the 'drive like a mimser' feather-footing for a day or two, to see how close I could get to the manufacturer's figures. Now, this was done midweek on very quiet roads, and I still couldn't get to within 90%of the claimed numbers.
Had it been in normal commute traffic, I'd have been blarted off the road for holding up the traffic flow.
On the other end of the scale, A recorded 5MPG was the record - a former Le Mans driver hooning an Opel Corsa OPC (1.4 turbo) around the area for 45 minutes at full chat. Limited to 225km/h. We were on that limiter quite a lot....
|
|
My 970 CooperS used to get about 10mpg driving round Snetterton or Brands Hatch.:-)
|
>> The economy might be a let down. Seems usual with these little turbo petrols. Our
>> Popemobile 1.2TSI 105PS is supposed to do 49 but we struggle to get 40 overall.
Interesting. Just coming up to 5k miles in my 90PS diesel Popemobile. Average consumption 48.25, best 53.87, worst 43.03. Fair amount of long distance work there though - mostly 300mile round trips to Liverpool in support of Lad at Uni.
|
|
If you are looking at a used 1.0 Ford then make sure it's had the recall work done on the cooling system - IIRC a plastic pipe was fracturing and as these engine hold so little coolant the engine fries almost instantly.
|
>> If you are looking at a used 1.0 Ford then make sure it's had the
>> recall work done on the cooling system - IIRC a plastic pipe was fracturing and
>> as these engine hold so little coolant the engine fries almost instantly.
>>
Cant say that I'm aware of any horror stories around the Ecoboost engines. I'm always dubious when Indie's dismiss new technology - often I think its because they don't know / understand the technology
|
The Ford Ecoboost engine has won lots of awards but my indie mechanic told me not to touch it with a bargepole.
Cant remember the reason , something to do with oil on it and what or how its getting used.
|
|
I had one of these engines in a focus a bit back as a hire car. One of them did about 35 mpg, the other did about 42 mpg. I didn't drive with economy in mind but i didn't thrash them either. I didn't think much to them tbh, the stop start system was very good though.
|
|
My next car will have a four cilinder non turbo petrol engine. The plan is long term ownership and I am far from convinced that tiny turbos are long term reliable or any more economical in real world use. At the moment the new model Honda Jazz is top of the short list.
|
>> My next car will have a four cilinder non turbo petrol engine. The plan is
>> long term ownership and I am far from convinced that tiny turbos are long term
>> reliable or any more economical in real world use. At the moment the new model
>> Honda Jazz is top of the short list.
>>
My Mark 2 Jazz with CVT is averaging 42.8mpg - 62% round towns.. tinyurl.com/hovl95z
So a Mark 3 should do a lot better..
Last edited by: madf on Fri 29 Apr 16 at 14:24
|
>> At the moment the new model
>> Honda Jazz is top of the short list.
>>
The current Jazz was late being introduced in Europe supposedly while Honda waited for their 3cyl 1 litre turbo engine. I've no idea what happened, but suddenly the car apppeared with the same engine as the last model.
|
|
They consulted a C4P focus group?
|
>> They consulted a C4P focus group?
>>
A bit of Googling suggests the 3cyl engines are imminent. I guess they must have had development issues.
|
>> I've no idea what happened, but suddenly the car apppeared with the same engine as the last model.
>>
The 1.3 engine in the mk3 Jazz is a new engine. The mk2 had 1.2 and 1.4 engines.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 29 Apr 16 at 16:01
|
That 3 cylinder engine ought to be perfectly balanced and smooth, but it has a couple of coarse vibration periods despite a short crankshaft with presumably four main bearings ... it's very lusty though at all speeds.
There was a spate of 3-cylinder 2-strokes years ago. DKW and Saab spring to mind. At their best those were very quiet and creamily smooth.
|
|
IIRC Ford tried to develop a three cylinder 2-stroke (2-stroke developments in Australia spring to mind), but had to give up as it couldn't meet emission standards.
|
|
Yeah, they were smoky and rather thirsty too. Black and dripping exhausts were the norm.
|
>> The 1.3 engine in the mk3 Jazz is a new engine. The mk2 had 1.2
>> and 1.4 engines.
>>
Well, that's a marketing 1.4 - both the mk1 and mk2 Jazz where 1339cc. Although somewhat different engines.
I didn't realise the mk3 was new - seems its part of Honda's "Earth Dreams Technology" which is what the 3cyl was/is going to be.
|
|
I suspect that the Earth Dreams Technology is marketing waffle for the engines ability to operate on the Atkinson cycle when there is low power demand, it was invented in 1882 but now achieved electronically using the I-VTEC and VTC systems fitted to the 1.3 engine.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 29 Apr 16 at 18:56
|
|
I suspect it's down to cost. The 4 cylinder engine is much the same as previous 1.3 engines, but the 3 cylinder job has turbo accretions and probably implications for cooling and transmission, and price ex works. Honda UK, being anunadventurous bean-counter outpost probably stymied anything new, and the market share is dwindling as a result of very little driver interest. Added to which the Jazz is no longer a UK assembled vehicle, and costs may be greater on that score.
Last edited by: NortonES2 on Fri 29 Apr 16 at 20:00
|
|
It will be interesting to see how the Yaris will be priced if it gets the 1.2 turbo petrol engine.
|
|
I said above that I do not want a tiny turbo engine., just wondering about the price point.
|
Are you referring to the Mazda3 ON?
In petrol guise, it's a naturally aspirated engine in both 1.6 & 2.0 guise. The latter with outputs of 120 and 165 horses, although no increase in torque with the 165. When I test drove two of them a few weeks ago, whilst looking at a Focus ST estate, I thought that they would make a reliable long term buy should I be in the market for that kind of mid sized vehicle in either hatch or saloon form.
Motorpoint have several low mileage examples and I would probably buy one over a Golf. Like you, I wouldn't buy a smaller capacity turbo petrol either if I were looking for long term ownership. Although I have no facts to dispute the reliability, or not, of such a motor!
|
Watch out - those Mazda petrol engines have a 14:1 compression ratio - surely that'll shorten it's life like a turbocharger....
Meh.
|
Watch out - those Mazda petrol engines have a 14:1 compression ratio - surely that'll shorten it's life like a turbocharger....
Wot like all those clapped out low mileage diesels you mean :o)
Compression of a diesel is 14:1 as a minimum, some are as high as 25:1.
|
Compression ration of 14:1 for a petrol engine is high if run on 95 Octane fuel surely. So the ECU and injection systems are avoiding knock.
And why mention compression of diesels when he was referring to the petrol engines? Although the Mazda diesel engines badged/marketed as SkyActiv have a compression ration of 14:11 too. Probably lower than average.
|
And why mention compression of diesels when he was referring to the petrol engines
Because with diesel type design of bearings, there is no reason why a high compression type of petrol engine should have any problems.
|
>>Compression of a diesel is 14:1 as a minimum, some are as high as 25:1.
Nowadays they're pretty much all under 18:1 to keep the NOx down.
And not many redline at 7000rpm
|
My in-laws have the 100PS version of this in the Fiesta with the Powershift dual clutch box.
It's a peach of an engine. Really gutsy performance, and is averaging 45 mpg in mostly short journeys around town.
No problems at all in 8,000 miles. Doesn't even use oil.
|
My FIL has decided on the 1.25 engine. He's having a look at Motorpoint place this week sometime
|
>> My FIL has decided on the 1.25 engine. He's having a look at Motorpoint place
>> this week sometime
Can't recommend them highly enough myself, since getting my last car there. My only criticism would be their website - had 36 cars of the type I wanted, but had to 'click' on each one to find out where it was.
'Phoned them and they said they could move any car to a site of my choosing - what, all 36 I replied? Understood they replied and gave me the numbers of the ones at my local place.
There were hundreds of cars there, all immaculately prepared. I was given the keys to three I was interested in while the sales rep went to find the fourth. After some time of going over those I had the keys for, I had to go and find the rep who gave me the keys to the fourth.
No pressure and no hard sell. I told the rep I was interested in a couple and would go home 'to sleep on it'. Next day I 'phoned and asked for a test drive on one. It was there waiting for me and after, an 'admittedly short' drive I agreed to buy it. Couldn't haggle.
I loved the no hassle approach and saved a couple of grand on main dealer prices.
|
Bought 2 new cars from Motorpoint
2007 Xtrail - bought car and whilst looking at it from house thought the tyres looked flat. Off to the local garage and they were showing 20 lbs of pressure. Looked at the sticker on the car - it said 2.0BAR!
2012 CRV - Wary of my first tyre episode I checked the tyre pressures right away - all showing 60+lbs pressure - obviously pumped up to max to sit in a field and never checked.
The car cleaning was poor - evidence of paintwork not being fully cleaned off / buffed up & wax crayon marks on a couple of windows.
So their pre-checks & valeting were not the best.
Xtrail bought 2007 sold 2012 - no issues just servicing
CRV bought 2012 - no issues just servicing
Overall happy with Motorpoint - get the attention to detail better and their offering wouldd be hard to beat.
|
|
RP, any chance of you directing the FiL towards a 'sensible touring' ST? Excellent residuals. Cheap running costs. If you are on the insurance you could hoon around in it when he's not looking.
|
Motorpoint have an almost new Fiesta ST-2 for £13.5k
Personally I think white really suits that model....if you could get away with three doors I think it would be as much fun as a Gti at almost half the price
|
And then straight to Mountune for the MP215 upgrade.
Probably the most fun you can have for anything like the money.
|
Very true DP. Read a road test and the engine turns out just under 200 horses in standard form, whilst under acceleration. Plus the Mountune £600 upgrade doesn't invalidate the warranty.
What's not to like ?
|
They don't, um, do an estate do they?
;-)
|
|
I cannot understand why it isn't available with 5 doors
|
...you'd need to wear a baseball cap to drive one of them......
Speaking of which, I seem to have mislaid mine.........
|
I have a surfeit...Ernies Coffee Shop, Giants, Jack Russell Brewery ad infinitum
Surplus to requirements with next t'tin top
Appen I should get missen a Westfield....,
|
|
I really wanted Mrs DP to get one instead of the MINI but she was having none of it :-(
|
|
Driving a 16 reg EcoBoost Fiesta at the moment while the A3 is undergoing having some remedial work done (long story...). It's in Zetec trim, and I think it's only the 100ps version - definitely slower than the Audi, but based on an expedition to Basingstoke and back today it is more fun to drive. Not bad at all.
|
|
As a sort of conclusion to the original post. Motorpoint had stacks of them both in 1.0 and 1.25 format. He got a 9 month old car for the price of a 3 year old from the local delaers. The ones at the dealers were covered in little faults, stone chips and worse and chipped alloys. The one he had was immaculate and he is fussy. It was an ex Enterprise hire car with 12k on it. On getting home he notices a large chip out of the windscreen. Motorpoint are replacing it rather than repairing. I've not seen it but it sounds a decent little motor.
|
Ford - 1.0 Three Cylinders. - Manatee
